[Hoot Gibson]

What do you mean "Obamacare hitting the fan over the next few months"? Are you implying that they are going to hold another repeal vote? nicker: How many so far? Is it 38 or 39?

Max Baucus is not running for the hills because he is afraid that Obamacare is going to be appealed. As for those House votes, they are going to look very good to the millions of victims of Obamacare in a few months.

[TheRealVille]

[Image: http://ww2.politicususa.com/wp-content/u...85x382.jpg]

For months, Republicans have accused the Obama administration of lying and omitting crucial information about Benghazi. In fact Republicans have done that, by sweeping aside the confusing facts and rumors that swirled on that tragic day.

Filmmaker Billy Wilder is credited with the quote “Hindsight is always 20/20,” although the quote is unsourced and may not have originated with him.

It’s also not entirely true. Mystery still swirls around many historical events. Some were not well-documented at the time, like the fire that devastated Montréal today in either 1763 or 1765. For others, important records have been hidden or lost. Playwright Christopher Marlowe was believed to have been killed in a drunken brawl in 1593, until 1925 when a newly discovered coroner’s report revealed a very different story.

Others were documented at the time, but people rejected the official story. The reasons may have little or nothing to do with the evidence, and the speculation (“Lizzie Borden took an axe/And gave her mother forty whacks“ may become better known than the actual verdicts. Borden was acquitted, but she was later suspected to be lesbian and public opinion turned against her.

Add in conspiracy theories, some later proved by evidence, others based on wishful thinking and a need for our chaotic world to make sense, and we find that hindsight is not always 20/20.

Still, the past is often clearer than the present, especially amidst the stress and chaos of violence. The phrase “fog of war” originated with this quote by Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz:

War is an area of uncertainty; three quarters of the things on which all action in War is based are lying in a fog of uncertainty to a greater or lesser extent. The first thing (needed) here is a fine, piercing mind, to feel out the truth with the measure of its judgment.
Such was the case on September 11, 2012, as armed men attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi at 9:40pm, four hours after protests began outside the U.S. embassy in Cairo. In the ensuing days, similar protests against a film about Islam erupted at U.S. diplomatic posts around the world.

I am not arguing the Benghazi attack was a protest that turned violent. We now know it was a planned attack. But that is 20/20 hindsight. At the time, with protests at U.S. diplomatic posts worldwide, it was not unreasonable to consider that Benghazi might be part of that pattern.

And that’s probably one reason Republicans consistently ignore those other protests when discussing the Benghazi attack. Bringing in those other facts – and they are facts – would muddy their claim that “everyone knew” Benghazi was a terrorist attack.

The parable of the blind men and the elephant is attributed to both Buddhism and Jainism. Regardless of its source, the story is familiar and apropos. Six blind men walk up to an elephant, each touching a different part. They then argue about what they have touched, each insisting that his experience is the full and complete truth. In the Buddhist canon Udana, the parable concludes:

O how they cling and wrangle, some who claim
For preacher and monk the honored name!
For, quarreling, each to his view they cling.
Such folk see only one side of a thing.
So it is with Benghazi. It may well be that former Libyan deputy chief of mission Gregory Hicks suspected terrorism almost immediately. Other Americans in Benghazi and Tripoli may have suspected likewise. The terrorists attacking the consulate and its CIA annex certainly knew who they were and what they had planned.

But other Americans in Libya may have suspected otherwise, and Americans in Cairo knew the crowd outside the embassy were, in fact, protesting a film. Halfway around the world, conflicting and confusing information flowed into Washington. Other information, also conflicting and confusing, had been arriving in the weeks and months before the attack. Still more information, also conflicting and confusing, would arrive in the days and weeks after.

Republicans have since sifted through that mountain of conflicting and confusing information for the handful of reports that 20/20 hindsight supports, and they tell the story as if the rest of the conflicting and confusing evidence never existed. Oh, and if the information doesn’t fit their theory, they doctor it.

Meanwhile, even as the Benghazi consulate was still burning, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney conflated Cairo and Benghazi, criticizing the State Department for a Cairo press release that Romney framed as being part of the mythical Obama Apology Tour. And last week Peggy Noonan breathlessly insisted that “The Obama White House sees every event as a political event. Really, every event, even an attack on a consulate and the killing of an ambassador.”

Political factors clearly weighed in the White House response over the following weeks. But, again, Noonan and Republicans make that argument that in isolation … omitting the fact that Mitt Romney began politicizing Benghazi before the bodies had even been recovered. Like the protests happening in Cairo and elsewhere, and like the confusing and conflicting information flowing into the State Department and CIA, Romney’s shamefully political attack doesn’t fit the Republican story of Obama Lied To Steal An Election.

http://www.politicususa.com/gops-lies-mi...andal.html

[Hoot Gibson]

^Another left wing opinion somebody else took time to write for you. How pathetic.

[TheRealVille]

^Another left wing opinion somebody else took time to write for you. How pathetic.

You get your opinions from Brietbart, the Washington Examiner, Redstate, and the Conservative Voice.

[TheRealVille]

Keep it up boys. :Thumbs:

[Image: http://ww2.politicususa.com/wp-content/u...85x295.jpg]

Despite the many attempts by Republicans to generate a scandal, a new CNN/ORC poll found that the president’s approval ratings have increased by two points.

The latest CNN/ORC poll reveals that President Obama’s approval rating has gone up by two points from 51% in April to 53% today, while his disapproval rating has fallen by two points from 47% to 45%. While 85% of those polled agree that the IRS targeted of political groups is very or somewhat important issue, by a margin of 61%-37% respondents believed that President Obama’s statements on the matter have been completely mostly true. (That 37% number comes up a lot in polling. It represents the higher end of the number of self-identified conservatives/Republicans in the country.) By a margin of 54%-42% respondents think Republicans are reacting appropriately to the matter, but the vast majority (55%-37%) believe that the IRS acted alone without White House orders.

http://www.politicususa.com/scandals-bac...tings.html





Gallup also.
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

[TheRealVille]

http://mediamatters.org/video/2013/05/19...eng/194140

[TheRealVille]

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/0...-cover-up/

[TheRealVille]

Republicans take their cues right out of the Mitch McConnell, "fight dirty, anything to win" playbook, and it's biting them in the ass.

Top White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer fought back against the week of Republican lies on Meet the Press, telling David Gregory, “We’ve seen this playbook from the Republicans before. What they want to do when they are lacking a positive agenda is they want to drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped up hearings, and false allegations. We’re not going to let that happen.”

He then proceeded to drop a few fact bombs on the alleged “scandals”.

http://www.politicususa.com/top-obama-ai...s-gop.html

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Republicans take their cues right out of the Mitch McConnell, "fight dirty, anything to win" playbook, and it's biting them in the ass.





http://www.politicususa.com/top-obama-ai...s-gop.html

Your source advertises itself as "real liberal politics". Can't you do any better than that?

Pfeiffer gave us a little different spin than Obama, Holder, the IRS gopher, and Carney. Rather than the usual "I don't know", the less than impressive Pfeiffer, kept telling us that everything was "irrelevant". And after the "kissie butt" questions from NBC, ABC, CNN, and CBS, Pfeiffer, another of the growing number of White House whores, found Chris Wallace's questions "offensive". Wallace seemed unwilling to play the usual hear no evil, see no evil, suck up game.

[the other guy]

^ you're hopeless

[Harry Rex Vonner]

I'm watching a rerun of Wallace's interview with Pfeiffer. I also saw Pfeiffer on Meet the Press. Pfeiffer talks awfully fast. He doe4sn't consider questions. He merely speedily spit6s out his answers. Now, anyone familiar with speech patterns and methods knows that this is proof of giving answers that are both memorized and rehearsed.

The boy likes to refer to the independent review board. He doesn't mention that the two who headed the "investigation", Mullen and Pickering, were hand chosen by the administration. Somehow, that doesn't indicate any independence, does it?

If all this scandal blows over with no repercussions for the boy and his administration of liars and incompetents, it will only get worse for those who believe in the foundational beliefs of our country as formulated by our founders.

[Hoot Gibson]

Your source advertises itself as "real liberal politics". Can't you do any better than that?

Pfeiffer gave us a little different spin than Obama, Holder, the IRS gopher, and Carney. Rather than the usual "I don't know", the less than impressive Pfeiffer, kept telling us that everything was "irrelevant". And after the "kissie butt" questions from NBC, ABC, CNN, and CBS, Pfeiffer, another of the growing number of White House whores, found Chris Wallace's questions "offensive". Wallace seemed unwilling to play the usual hear no evil, see no evil, suck up game.

I watched Pfeiffer lying on one of the alphabet talk shows. He was apparently on a satellite link. If I am not mistaken, he was reading his talking points straight off of a teleprompter, based on how his eyes were darting to and fro.

I have to give Bill Clinton credit. The people that he sent to lie on the Sunday talk shows were at least intelligent enough not to need a prompter to remember their lines. From top to bottom, this is the most stupid administration that I have seen in my lifetime and I honestly cannot think of any other administration that was even close to this one in that department. Of course, they are just a reflection of the people who put them into office.

[WideMiddle03]

[Image: http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak...6675_n.jpg]

[TheRealVille]

Your source advertises itself as "real liberal politics". Can't you do any better than that?

Pfeiffer gave us a little different spin than Obama, Holder, the IRS gopher, and Carney. Rather than the usual "I don't know", the less than impressive Pfeiffer, kept telling us that everything was "irrelevant". And after the "kissie butt" questions from NBC, ABC, CNN, and CBS, Pfeiffer, another of the growing number of White House whores, found Chris Wallace's questions "offensive". Wallace seemed unwilling to play the usual hear no evil, see no evil, suck up game.

Any different than you guys post from Redstate, Fox, The Conservative Voice, and Breitbart?

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Any different than you guys post from Redstate, Fox, The Conservative Voice, and Breitbart?

As I recall. I've never needed to quote directly from any of those sources. I can draw conclusions from listening to and observing the behavior of the principals and applying a little knowledge and common sense.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

[Image: http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak...6675_n.jpg]

WideMiddle03, a picture is truly worth a thousand words. And, in your case, a short caption reveals even more. But you better be care. Barry may try to hit you with his purse. Excellent post.:Thumbs:

Also, some may want to check Marine regulations. A Marine is not allowed to hold an umbrella while in uniform. But, Barry wouldn't know that. He would only know it when he read it in the newspaper like the rest of us. I suppose Barry is still preoccupied by the borderline NBA "player" who announced his homosexuality.

[TheRealVille]

WideMiddle03, a picture is truly worth a thousand words. And, in your case, a short caption reveals even more. But you better be care. Barry may try to hit you with his purse. Excellent post.:Thumbs:

Also, some may want to check Marine regulations. A Marine is not allowed to hold an umbrella while in uniform. But, Barry wouldn't know that. He would only know it when he read it in the newspaper like the rest of us. I suppose Barry is still preoccupied by the borderline NBA "player" who announced his homosexuality.

We've been through this in the other thread. Obama was perfectly legal asking them to do this. The rules are in black and white in there. The marine spokesman even affirmed that he what he did was ok.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

We've been through this in the other thread. Obama was perfectly legal asking them to do this. The rules are in black and white in there. The marine spokesman even affirmed that he what he did was ok.

"Black and white"? Now, who is the "racist"? Seriously, how about posting the regulation, with a reliable source, so we can all be educated. Somehow, the alleged "marine spokesman" saying it was "ok" doesn't meet the smell test.

[vector]

"Black and white"? Now, who is the "racist"? Seriously, how about posting the regulation, with a reliable source, so we can all be educated. Somehow, the alleged "marine spokesman" saying it was "ok" doesn't meet the smell test.

this is all you need to know


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...mely-rare/

[vector]

"Black and white"? Now, who is the "racist"? Seriously, how about posting the regulation, with a reliable source, so we can all be educated. Somehow, the alleged "marine spokesman" saying it was "ok" doesn't meet the smell test.

now you hoot don't need to get your panties in a wad

[Hoot Gibson]

"Black and white"? Now, who is the "racist"? Seriously, how about posting the regulation, with a reliable source, so we can all be educated. Somehow, the alleged "marine spokesman" saying it was "ok" doesn't meet the smell test.

I posted the regulation earlier, Harry. The spokesman was obviously asked to justify Obama's action and apparently all the Marine Corps' lawyers could find was a "catch all" clause in 10 USC § 5063(a), which was clearly written to broadly define the Marine Corps' duties, and to place some limits on the Corps' mission.

[TheRealVille]

"Black and white"? Now, who is the "racist"? Seriously, how about posting the regulation, with a reliable source, so we can all be educated. Somehow, the alleged "marine spokesman" saying it was "ok" doesn't meet the smell test.

Everything is on the other thread. Do your own work.

[TheRealVille]

I posted the regulation earlier, Harry. The spokesman was obviously asked to justify Obama's action and apparently all the Marine Corps' lawyers could find was a "catch all" clause in 10 USC § 5063(a), which was clearly written to broadly define the Marine Corps' duties, and to place some limits on the Corps' mission.

Don't forget chain of command training. And, I posted what the spokesman said.

[Hoot Gibson]

Don't forget chain of command training. And, I posted what the spokesman said.

Soldiers can be punished for not following lawful orders or for following unlawful orders. There are limits to the authority of the "chain of command" in our military and ultimately members of the military are personally responsible for complying with the laws and regulations to which they are subject. The defense of "just following orders" has been tried and has failed repeatedly throughout our history.

Might and right are not synonymous. What Obama did was a mistake. As president, he makes and gets away with many mistakes. His attitude has always been that rules apply to other people. That has been his biggest mistake, and he is slowly finding out that he will ultimately be held responsible for his behavior.

The big question on the Benghazi scandal that has not been answered months after Obama's administration refused to send help to the Americans in that Libyan city, is where was Obama that night? Where are the photos of him personally managing the crisis. You know, like the ones that the Obama staff released immediately after the raid that resulted in bin Laden's death? Was he sleeping soundly in the safety of his bed as those Americans were pleading for his help?

[WideMiddle03]

[Image: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MSZb0zafnkk/UE...edneck.jpg]

[Harry Rex Vonner]

I posted the regulation earlier, Harry. The spokesman was obviously asked to justify Obama's action and apparently all the Marine Corps' lawyers could find was a "catch all" clause in 10 USC § 5063(a), which was clearly written to broadly define the Marine Corps' duties, and to place some limits on the Corps' mission.

Catchalls in the United States Code aren't definitive. They are often used, as in this case, as an escape for justification after the fact of a unusual act or situation. What has traditionally been the policy in regard to umbrellas and Marines in uniform? That is what, in reality, matters.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Everything is on the other thread. Do your own work.

I took time to review the other thread and the evidence given in opposition to your position is convincing. On the other hand, your pictures, etc. were deceptive and misleading at best. They were not truthful. On the other hand, all this makes you a natural for a position in Barry's administration. You are no less allergic to the truth than Pfeiffer, Carney, Miller (the IRS gopher), and the blend of MSNBC fruits, nuts, and prostitutes.

[Hoot Gibson]

Catchalls in the United States Code aren't definitive. They are often used, as in this case, as an escape for justification after the fact of a unusual act or situation. What has traditionally been the policy in regard to umbrellas and Marines in uniform? That is what, in reality, matters.

The regulation regarding uniforms lists all of the acceptable components and accessories, down to the placement of pins, acceptable rain gear, and the type of boots that must be worn. The conditions under which female members of the Marine Corps may hold an umbrella while in uniform are clearly defined. No such conditions are defined for male members of the Corps. As a lawful regulation, Marines who violate part of the uniform regulations may be punished under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Most likely the punishment would consist of either a written reprimand or an Article 15 action. Article 15 actions are placed in the member's permanent human resources file if the member's rank is a SGT or above. There are different levels of reprimands, but a General Officer Letter of Reprimand is often a career killer. A Commander can also direct a written reprimand to be filed locally and destroyed after a period of good behavior. I believe that the Corpsman who held Obama's umbrella is a Corporal.

[TheRealVille]

^ Now an expert on military affairs after never spending a day in the military. I can take a guess, by listening to what the marine spokesman said, and probably hit it closer than you on these two guys. Not one word will be said, and not one iota of anything will be on their record. It will be a non issue to the marines. The only that will take issue is people like you, that hate Obama.

[TheRealVille]

I took time to review the other thread and the evidence given in opposition to your position is convincing. On the other hand, your pictures, etc. were deceptive and misleading at best. They were not truthful. On the other hand, all this makes you a natural for a position in Barry's administration. You are no less allergic to the truth than Pfeiffer, Carney, Miller (the IRS gopher), and the blend of MSNBC fruits, nuts, and prostitutes.

Did I expect anything less from you?