Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
And really " what does it matter anyway "
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Buck, the posts by PaulS and Spence should confirm for you the circle jerk of denial that they keep spinning. And the last one by Spence perfectly describes their own effort: "God that's pathetic." At least he occasionally uses the word "God." "Heaven" only knows why.
I mean, really? Paul says "They thought they had adequate security." Is that supposed to be an excuse for being wrong? the so-called "security" plan was a departure from the norm. And it was seriously stupid. (Not to mention Stevens' repeated requests for more protection).
Then he asks "Maybe the Repubs. should have voted for more money for security?" As if they could get past Obama's veto. Maybe the Dems should have provided more security with the proper funding? They have no compunction about spending money we don't have whenever they want to do something. Funding adequate security would have been a financial drip in a bathtub compared to all the "investments" in their sacred Great Society programs which have bankrupted the nation. Let us just overlook the fact that they intentionally provided a lack of normal security in order to show the Libyans that we weren't somehow trying to invade their turf, or bullying our way into it. Lack of funding was not the problem. Lack of proper security provided by an intentional and foolish plan was the problem.
Then he says "There has been more time spent on this than trying to find out how we ended up in Iraq." I didn't know that time was spent on trying to find out how we ended up there. Didn't think that was even a mystery. And so what? Must there be some equivalence in time spent? What does his sentence have to do with anything other than trying to make something important look ridiculous.
Then he says "Many of Our embassies are in dangerous places with dangerous people." Which makes one ask why we had such inadequate security.
Finally he asks "Should we leave 1/2 of the Mid East and Africa?"
Many think we should. But, if we don't, shouldn't we have better protection than was provided at Benghazi?
But the circle jerk of denial insists that we should not be wasting time on such things because lots of "investigations" supposedly didn't find that Clinton did anything wrong . . . wink wink.
Its all "old news" except when they come across some article in the NY Times or Salon that makes their circle jerk look good. Then it's worth talking about. (Unless we keep bringing up time-wasting discussions about the incompetent management of Benghazi.)