No Clinton?.....then no Kerry

[sirs]

Report: GOP senators won’t confirm Kerry until Clinton testifies on Benghazi

Republican senators will refuse to confirm Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., as Secretary of State until the nation’s current top diplomat, Hillary Clinton, testifies about her handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack.

“The Senate is expected to take up Kerry’s nomination in early January, but multiple Republican senators have already said they won’t agree to a vote on Kerry’s nomination until Clinton testifies about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi,” The Cable’s Josh Rogin notes.

Clinton backed out of testifying at a congressional hearing last week after fainting and suffering a concussion. She was the first cabinet-level official to acknowledge that terrorists played a role in the assault on the U.S. mission in Benghazi.

“For some time, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb and other groups have launched attacks and kidnappings from northern Mali into neighboring countries,” Clinton said during a United Nations meeting in New York on September 26. “Now, with a larger safe haven and increased freedom to maneuver, terrorists are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions. And they are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions underway in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi,” (emphasis added).

A week earlier, though, Clinton was content to have people such as the father of Tyrone Woods — the former Navy Seal killed during the attack on Benghazi — believe that an anti-Islam Youtube video was the occasion for the assault, which took place on the eleventh anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

“Well, this is what Hillary did,” Mr. Woods said of his meeting with Clinton immediately following the assault. “She came over and, you know, she did the same thing, separately came over and talked with me.  I gave her a hug, shook her hand, and she did not appear to be one bit sincere at all.  She mentioned that thing about, ‘We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video.’ That was the first time I had even heard about anything like that.”

Hopefully she's feeling all better, now

[Xavier_Onassis]

Dumb shits abound among the idiot GOP

[sirs]

Yea, as if you wouldn't be demanding Secretary Rice's head on a platter, much less simply provide testimony as head of the State Dept, concluded to have significantly screwed up in the whole Benghazi debacle. 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Look, mommie!

Another dumb shit!

[sirs]

Another brilliant rhetort from our supposed language "professor"

[Xavier_Onassis]

Read what you posted about heads on plates. You make no sense. It is just more inane gibberish.

You will remain ignorant forever.

Most people have eaten things smarter than you.

[sirs]

You, a language professor, have never heard the rhetorical phrase head on a platter??  Seriously??

[Xavier_Onassis]

I have indeed heard the expression, but your use of it makes zero sense. This is a minor matter, and the only reason the idiot Republican'ts are making a big deal of it is that they want to give Prettyboy Rubio a chance to show off for the teabaggers.

I fail to see why I would demand any bloody thing, or why you would assume that I would. You make no sense.

[sirs]

I have indeed heard the expression,

Well then what's the problem??

but your use of it makes zero sense.

It made perfect sense, as in its rhetorical use.  When someone says "off with their head", unless its an jihadist judge, it's usually a figurative term.  When you're foaming at the mouth, in your vitriolic rants aimed at Republicans and conservatives, the figurative term as in expecting you to demand someone's head on a platter, if they had been in charge of the agency that was directly involved in allowing the 1st murdered ambassador in 30years to occur under their watch, makes 100% sense.  Just because you don't agree, doesn't make it any less relevant

   This is a minor matter, and the only reason the idiot Republican'ts are making a big deal of it is that they want to give Prettyboy Rubio a chance to show off for the teabaggers.

Wow....let's just throw the kitchen sink in with that tangent.  You forgot to add NRA, racists, Bush & Hitler, since that would have made just as much sense as referencing Replucants, Rubio and teabaggers     

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is absolutely no justification for denying the nomination of Kerry because of some stupid committee. This is just annoying grandstanding by fools.

[Plane]

Clinton must testify.

What elese should be done to encourage her complyance?

By the way ,just getting Kerry out of the senate is almost worth the price.

[BT]

There is absolutely no justification for denying the nomination of Kerry because of some stupid committee. This is just annoying grandstanding by fools.

There is no doubt that GOP can't stop the confirmation. But they certainly can delay it. It's all part of the process.

[Xavier_Onassis]

No one questions the ability of the Republican'ts to act up like a bunch of hooligans. They are assholes, and can be depended on to act like assholes. But they were not elected to act like assholes,and the more they do this, the less likely they will be reelected.

[BT]

No one questions the ability of the Republican'ts to act up like a bunch of hooligans. They are assholes, and can be depended on to act like assholes. But they were not elected to act like assholes,and the more they do this, the less likely they will be reelected.

The fact of the matter is they are exercising due diligence. As is their right and their duty.

I'm certain a debriefing of the Current Secretary of State will aide them in determining whether Sen. John Kerry has the skillset necessary to hold his own on the ever changing world stage. For the Children^TM

[Xavier_Onassis]

If they refuse to approve Kerry because of whether or not Hillary testifies, this is unrelated to the welfare of the country and is  just the Republican'ts being childish chickenshits.