Could Hillary have been trying to torpedo Obama's re-election?

[sirs]

With the massively damning testimony coming out of DC, demonstrating FACTS that the state dept AND the Obama administration not only denied requested additional security from Lybia, prior to the Ambassador Stevens' murder, it completely topedos the Obama talking points that "his chief concen is the safety of those diplomats", not to mention the asanine effort to try and make this about a video.  FACT was there were no protests outside the Benghazi compound.  It was a massive attack, by Islamic terrorists and AlQeada supporters, ON 911.

And yet, the Obama clowns still want us to believe this is the fault of a video....and Bush by extension

As I've said, if this were a Republican administration, the MSM would be going apoplectic, and demanding heads roll, if not the President's resignation.  Remember how apesnot they went with Bush on the Carrier giving his Mission Accomplished speech? (which of course was then taken completely out of context by that same MSM and the lunatic left).  Remember Abu Graib, and how those few idiot soldiers were supposedly representative of the Administration's position on such acts (IIRC, pundits claiming that the rot moves upward)

[sirs]

As Eliana Johnson points out over at NRO, this morning, David Axelrod continued to throw Hillary Clinton and the State Department under the bus, doubling down on the story that Joe Biden's royal "we" at the veep debate referred only to a party of two -- himself and the President -- not knowing about the requests for enhanced security In Libya. Apparently, in the Obama presidency, the buck doesn't stop with the President . . . it stops with, in Axelrod's words, "the security folks at the State Department."
 
What Biden and Axelrod are essentially saying is that Hillary Clinton is thoroughly to blame for this debacle.  If she somehow knew about the requests but denied them (and then failed to communicate that fact to the higest levels after the attacks), she's been guilty of a serious breach of judgment.  It's really a firing offense (not that President Obama can do that for political reasons . . .) If, on the other hand, those requests were being denied and she didn't even know about them, then she's manifestly incompetent --- also a firing offense.
 
I've never been a big fan of Hillary Clinton's, but I can hardly believe she'd make the mistake of not doing proper CYA on a matter of this magnitude, especially when thoughts of 2016 lurk in her (and certainly her husband's) brain. It seems to me more likely that the Obama White House generally is just trying to insulate itself from blame by letting all the garbage run downhill into the Secretary of State's office.  And in addition, Joe Biden would probably looove to dispatch a potential rival for 2016, since he apparently harbors presidential ambitions (case closed: that means he's absolutely delusional, especially after that bizarre debate outing last week).
 
Ed Klein is reporting that Bill Clinton doesn't like this turn of events one bit.  As I predicted here, the whole Clinton-Obama dynamic is becoming more fascinating by the day.  Indeed, "rev the bus -- someone's going under it" . . . but the Clinton are no doubt determined that Hillary isn't going to be the one to take the fall for this.
 
So expect more details damaging to Obama and Biden slowly to trickle out

[Xavier_Onassis]

Shave off one eyebrow.

The value of asymmetry as an object lesson is not to be taken lightly.

[sirs]

Do you have anything serious to post?  Or are you just off your medications again?

[Xavier_Onassis]

You have not posted anything but nutzoid rightwing crap since I first had the displeasure to read one of your posts. I do not take you seriously, sirs. There are ranting street lunatics I find more credible than you.

[Christians4LessGvt]

Could Hillary have been trying to torpedo Obama's re-election?

SIRS...if she did...they fired back and threw her under the bus!



Biden's toxic victory 

By Michael Gerson

Monday, October 15, 2012

Normally, a debate "victory" doesn't require quite so much damage control. Following Vice President Biden's manic, careening ride through global politics last week, President Obama is left to make a variety of cleanups and clarifications.

On Libya, Biden managed to further muddle a muddled narrative. His claim that the administration had no knowledge of requests for added security in Benghazi required immediate correction. He was "speaking about himself and the president," said White House spokesman Jay Carney. Which served to highlight the culpability of the State Department and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while Clinton's husband is stumping the country to salvage Obama's reelection effort. Biden went on to blame "the intelligence community" for the administration's multiday misinformation campaign, even though elements of the intelligence community apparently knew the truth within 24 hours of the attack. Biden raised more uncomfortable questions about the Libyan fiasco than weeks of congressional hearings could manage.

On Afghanistan, Biden described a policy of total and unconditional retreat that the Obama administration does not actually hold. "We are leaving in 2014, period," said Biden. Responsible representatives of the administration put it a little differently: U.S. combat forces are leaving in 2014, but considerable special operations and training forces will remain to help prevent the Taliban from reestablishing a terrorocracy. Biden, in fact, was representing his own position in an internal White House debate the abject-surrender option, rather than the administration's stated view. During the debate, the other leader who must have been giggling was the Taliban's Mohammad Omar.

On Iran, Biden seemed to indicate that the regime's enrichment program is no longer a primary American concern since the republic doesn't have anything to put the enriched uranium in. Enrichment is the most difficult part of developing a nuclear bomb. Once achieved, weaponization is a relatively short step. Biden's response to Iran's defiant enrichment march? "Let's all calm down a little bit here."

So, in a mere 90 minutes, Biden managed to throw Hillary Clinton under the bus, CIA Director David Petraeus under the bus, our Afghan allies and the Afghan people under the bus and our Middle Eastern allies who fear an Iranian bomb under the bus. Which means that Obama, in trying to explain himself, is in for a bumpy ride. There is a reason Biden is generally kept out of press earshot. He is forever poised between an indiscretion and a different indiscretion.

But Biden's performance will be forever remembered not for its content but for its tone. I have occasionally admired Biden's emotional transparency and "happy warrior" enthusiasm. His debate presentation in Kentucky, in contrast, was a collection of disturbing, disorderly appetites. He displayed scene-chewing antics and preening exhibitionism and smirking rudeness and egotistical exuberance and bullying condescension. It was the attack of the feral ham actor. It would have been embarrassing if done in front of a mirror, much less on a debate stage.

This has complicated Obama's life in another way. The road-rage wing of the Democratic Party (the GOP has one as well) views the Biden meltdown as a pioneering achievement in political discourse. Former governor Howard Dean, an expert in nontraditional political deportment, argues that Biden is "an excellent role model" for Obama. Since adopting this model would disqualify Obama for the presidency, elements of the left are bound to be disappointed with the president's debate performances. And it will be harder for Obama to claim the mantle of bipartisanship when his running mate is celebrated for his incivility.

Biden has also marginally complicated the work of democracy. His supporters say that Joe is just being Joe, that he is one of a kind. But all ethics from the Golden Rule to the categorical imperative, involve universalization. If Biden's behavior were universalized, American politics would be a squalid, carnival sideshow. Or cable television. Whichever is worse. Americans have every right to hate politics if it looks like this.

At the height of a close election, it is worth a reminder that civility is the essential democratic virtue. Civility is not the same thing as niceness. The high stakes of politics can produce intense disagreements. But manners "even cold, formal ones" communicate a modicum of mutual respect and preserve the possibility of cooperation. John Stuart Mill called democracy "government by discussion." Biden has left our discussion more toxic, and Obama's task more difficult.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-bidens-damaging-debate-victory/2012/10/15/c2e74c16-16ee-11e2-9855-71f2b202721b_story.html

[Christians4LessGvt]

Axelrod Throws State Department Under Benghazi Bus

By Eliana Johnson
October 14, 2012
 
The State Department is the latest casualty of the Obama administration's obfuscation of the events surrounding the Benghazi attack.

Tearing a few pages out of the old Clinton playbook, David Axelrod carefully defined the word "we" this morning for Fox News' Chris Wallace: when the Vice President said in Wednesday's debate that "we" weren't aware of the Benghazi consulate's requests for increased security, "we" included only the President and the Vice President, not the Obama administration at large or the State Department.  You got that, right?

In response to Wallace's inquiry about whether the President takes personal responsibility for the denial of security requests in Benghazi, Axelrod said, "these were judgments that were made by security folks at the State Department."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330358/axelrod-throws-state-department-under-benghazi-bus-eliana-johnson

[sirs]

You have not posted anything but nutzoid rightwing crap since I first had the displeasure to read one of your posts. I do not take you seriously, sirs. There are ranting street lunatics I find more credible than you.

And yet you respond with far more pathetic leftist lunatic rantings.  You, a supposed teacher of all things, can't be bothered to establish even a coherent sentence to back up your ridiculous accusations & claims.  No, your attempt to "debate" is encapsulated in the above post

[sirs]

So, with the posts Cu4 has presented, then Hillary has to be fired.  If indeed, it was the State Dept, and the State Dept alone that refused the extra security being requested, while sitting on billions budgeted for precisely such requests (instead buying Chevy Volts for some of their European ambassadors), then she was either grossly incompetent, or really did a terrible job at CYA.  In either case, IF the buck stops at the State Dept, Hillary should be fired, or she should resign

Who wants to take any bets that this completely stopped at the State Dept, and the requests for extra security were never passed on to the WH?

[Christians4LessGvt]

SIRS....looks like the heat was rising so Hillary fell on the sword to try and stop the bleeding,
but Obama throwing Hillary under the bus wont help with the women vote.




Clinton: I'm responsible for diplomats' security

From Elise Labott, CNN-updated 10:36 PM EDT,

Mon October 15, 2012

Lima, Peru (CNN) -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday tried to douse a political firestorm over the deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya, saying she's responsible for the security of American diplomatic outposts.

"I take responsibility," Clinton said during a visit to Peru. "I'm in charge of the State Department's 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn't be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They're the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."

But she said an investigation now under way will ultimately determine what happened at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, where Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed on September 11.

"I take this very personally," Clinton said. "So we're going to get to the bottom of it, and then we're going to do everything we can to work to prevent it from happening again, and then we're going to work to bring whoever did this to us to justice."
Clinton: Benghazi my responsibility The attack took place in the eastern Libyan city that was the cradle of that country's 2011 revolution. Obama administration officials initially blamed a mob inflamed by a U.S.-produced movie that mocked Islam and its Prophet Mohammed, but later said the storming of the consulate appears to have been a terrorist attack.

With criticism growing, Vice President Joe Biden said during last week's vice presidential debate that the White House did not know of requests to enhance security at Benghazi, contradicting testimony by State Department employees that requests had been made and rejected. After the debate, the White House said the vice president did not know of the requests because they were handled, as is the practice, by the State Department.

"In the wake of an attack like this, in the fog of war, there's always going to be confusion," Clinton said. "And I think it is absolutely fair to say that everyone had the same intelligence. Everyone who spoke tried to give the information that they had. As time has gone on, that information has changed. We've gotten more detail, but that's not surprising. That always happens."

She added, "What I want to avoid is some kind of political gotcha or blame game."

"I know that we're very close to an election," Clinton said. "I want to just take a step back here and say from my own experience, we are at our best as Americans when we pull together. I've done that with Democratic presidents and Republican presidents."

Stevens, State Department computer expert Sean Smith and security contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods died in the Benghazi assault, which State Department officials now say was the work of dozens of armed men.

Clinton also described a desperate scene in the State Department during the hours of the attack, as staff tried to find out what had happened.

"This was a many-hour ordeal that we were all involved in, and I was deeply concerned as you would obviously assume, to hear about an attack," she said. Not only was the picture coming out of Libya murky, but also, "Then we couldn't find Ambassador Stevens, and we were trying desperately to figure out what happened to him and to Sean Smith and to the others who were there."

Clinton said her mission now is to make sure such an attack will never happen again, and also to ensure the work of American diplomats won't be stopped even in dangerous areas like Benghazi.

"We can't retreat. We have to continue to lead. We have to be engaged," she said. "We can't hang out behind walls." She said Stevens, who came to Benghazi on a cargo ship to start building ties with rebel leaders during last year's revolt, "knew that more than anybody."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/15/us/clinton-benghazi/index.html

[sirs]

I am getting a little tired of the Administration trying to deflect from the gross incompetence of the Ambassador's death with the ongoing line they're "going to brings those who did this to justice".  The FIRST thing you DON'T do, if you want to bring those to justice", is not secure the immediate area ASAP, with some form of military detachment.  The SECOND thing you DON'T do, if you want to "bring those to justice" is to pull the FBI out, before they even got in. 

[sirs]

Hillary takes some steps to salvage her own credibility -- while simultaneously heaving Obama and Biden under the bus they were aiming toward her

Oh, my, this is priceless.  From Peru, Hillary Clinton has "taken responsibility" for Benghazi.  No doubt, on its face, the act would seem to be a heroic effort to take the heat off the President and Vice President as the election nears.  But with the Clintons, nothing is ever as it seems.  Keep in mind that:

She did this the night before a real make-or-break debate for the President;

By doing it she made Obama and Biden look small and cowardly for seeking to throw her under the bus, thereby elevating her stature while diminishing theirs;

She did nothing to reduce the pressure on the President and Veep to take responsibility -- in fact, she increased it;

She ensured Libya and her move would be a major topic at the must-win debate for Obama tomorrow night (eliminating any possibility that extensive discussion of foreign affairs and Benghazi would be deferred for the foreign policy debate);

She raised the question -- which now may be put to Obama -- of whether she should be fired.  If she is asked, of course she may answer demurely that she serves at the pleasure of the President. In any case, he is now hamstrung; if he answers "yes," she should be fired, he infuriates a lot of Dems -- and potentially a lot of women, but if he answers "no," he risks seeming insufficiently upset about what happened to the independents;

She makes the best of a bad situation for herself.  Of course she is responsible for what happened -- at least she salvages some respect for her leadership by at least being willing to admit it (denying it wouldn't help her at all anyway in 2016 if she chooses to run).

Anyone who watched the Clintons throughout the '90's know that both of them are willing to evade accountability and responsibility to a virtually unbelievable degree if they perceive that doing so is to their political advantage.  It wasn't that she was worn down.  Hillary must have realized that by doing what she did, she at least takes some steps to salvage her own credibility -- while simultaneously heaving Obama and Biden under the bus they were aiming toward her.

Nicely played, no?

[Xavier_Onassis]

By 2016 this entire thing will have been as forgotten as the attack on the Cole is today.

Hillary did the right thing. Of course, 99.9% of all the consulates in the world of all the nations in the world could be destroyed by a rocket attack.

This is nothing that matters much to the presidential race, nor should it.

[sirs]

Unless of course this was a GOP administration, and it "happened on their watch".  Then all hell would break loose, the left screeching for heads to roll (figuratively of course, knowing how Mr. literal likes to play his deflective games), firings, and of course the President to resign.  IF this were a Republican adminstration and Sec of State

But since its "the chosen", nothing to see here...move along to more important matters like Big Bird & Elmo

[Xavier_Onassis]

Symmetry again.

Go shave off an eyebrow. You do not understand how ridiculous you sound.