Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

One of the challenges the Republican party faces is that they have become the party of anti-government conspiracy theories fueled in large part by the talking heads with an agenda, a receptive audience and a profit motive.

The base loves it, the establishment party leaders, not so much; but they are unwilling to take on the Limbaughs and Becks for fear of a challenge from the right.

And most importantly for the party's future, the objective, critical thinking moderates dont want anything to do with it.

 

when you're dealing with known liars, you have to try and figure out what's going on with the information that's available. the video tape excuse from the administration is a known lie. their credibility has already been destroyed on this issue. i dont choose to keep believing in fairy tales.

 

So, umm, who DO you believe or what do you believe in?

It's politics... seriously. You can't even begin to try and say that you don't believe in fairy tales or liars, especially if you're a (f)right-winger these days.

 

Why not let Congressional oversight committees do their job rather than jump on the conspiracy bandwagon and believe undocumented allegations from less than reliable sources and ideologues with a political agenda and a history of lies, deception and misrepresentation?

 

The video was causing riots in other parts of the Middle East at the same time as Benghazi. I don't know why this is a lie? It is easy to see why one might think this was the cause of a riot in Benghazi. It is easy to see why one might make connections like that.

 

Because if it's not a lie there's no way to make a political gain out of it, d'uh.

 

McCain called for some sort of Watergate Commission. I hope Ken Starr is still available. He'd get to the bottom of this Benghazi business (and anything else that might or might not have anything to do with Benghazi ) for sure.

 

Republicans skip Benghazi hearing; complain about lack of information on Benghazi | The Cable

isn't this special?

 

Yes, isn't that special. Special but not surprising. Same shit, same party just different day.

 

There are a limited number of ways Congress can express their outrage. Are you proud of the way the US has handled this matter up to this point?
--- merged: Nov 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM ---

There will always be conspiracy theorist, but our government could simply tell us what happened and who is accountable for any failings. If they do/did that this goes away. Over two months to "investigate"???? BS!

 

oh ace

You trip me out. During the Bush era, shit was continually swept under the rug and we still don't know half of what went down but OHMYFUCKINGGOD! It's taking two months to fully and thoroughly investigate Benghazi! Let's impeach! Socialist! Birther! Muslim! Terrorist! Teabags! Move to Canuckistan! Voter Fraud! Santa Claus! Liberal Bias! Welostbutwecan'tadmitwe'rejustoutoftouchwiththecountrysowe'llfindeverypossibleexcuseuntilsomethingstickstothewallsowecansavehalfaface!

 

McCain has certainly been the nosiest elephant in the room lately.

Just an angry bitter old man still holding resentments for his shellacking in 08.

Whining that Susan Rice, with more 15 years of foreign policy/national security experience, is not qualified to be Sec of State...but Sarah Palin was qualified to be a heartbeat away from the White House.....then dismissing similar misstatements of Condi Rice as irrelevant.

Comparing what appears to be an intelligence failure and subsequent fuck-up to the criminal activities of Watergate.

Demanding a special select committee (that of course he thinks he should co-chair) only because he is term-limited as ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and he loses his leadership post at the end of the year.

The old McCain demonstrated an independent streak on occasion....voting against the Bush tax cuts, proposing comprehensive immigration reform.... His only interest now is getting in front of a camera and on the Sunday talk shows more than any other member of Congress and remaining relevant when he knows his time has passed.

 

it would be nice if once, just once, something would come from the right that wasn't idiotic. the inability for conservative "thinking" to address anyone who has not already entered that reality-optional space is a really basic problem for the republicans. this is at the center of such "soul searching" one reads is ongoing on the part of people who think about how to prevent themselves from becoming even more obsolete than they already are.

 

Where did this come from? I have not called for impeachment. I simply believe we could have gotten all the key players on record and know exactly what happened in terms of the decisions and communications made by US officials. If I were President I would have the answers and I would have held a press conference letting the public know, address questions, and present how I would resolve the matter - i.e., who is getting fired, etc.
--- merged: Nov 19, 2012 at 2:43 PM ---

When Powell had an issue with faulty intelligence, he "man'd up". I think he actually was so offended that it lead to his resignation.
Condelessa Rice was never left handing out to dry. Whenever she spoke she had the support of the administration.
Scooter Libby was convicted of purjery and not pardoned by President Bush.
Susan Rice, however, has not said a word since giving misleading statements. And she, according to the President, did not know a GD thing about what she was asked to talk about - in addition to not having anyone in the administration provide any cover, self righteous indignation excluded. Nor has President Obama supported investigation by independent counsel - with testimony under oath.

Do you have a problem when a Presidential administration is purposefully misleading to the public? I am not using the word "lie" at this point on purpose.
--- merged: Nov 19, 2012 at 2:48 PM ---

Not gonna happen. You know it is not gonna happen. What is your point???

Republicans are going to go ape-shit when they think they have something on Democrats - but Democrats don't go ape-shit when they think they have something on Republicans???

Do you actually think Democrats are so superior in this regard? It is politics! It is the way it was thousands of years ago and it will be the same thousands of years from now.

What is worse being "idiotic" or naive?

 

ace, that's a false equivalence. the false equivalence follows from projection, which is a quite basic move that the far right has used to make its actions appear normal for years, but arbitrarily asserting that some "other side" does the same as they do. compare the right attempting to make something out of nothing over benghazi with democratic party inaction on the wholesale fraud that was the bush administration's case for war in iraq.

more importantly, in the regular world, one that is not shaped by the infotainment particular to conservatives, the idea that anyone would take the right seriously on this after they supported the bush administration's iraq war is simply laughable.

this is not to say that i'm all hooray obama administration. witness their repetition of the spinelessness of the bush period on this latest israeli massacre in gaza. of course conservatives don't have shit to say about that given that they were falling all over themselves to align to the right of likud during the election campaign. better to twaddle on about dead horses.

 

There is no "other side", there is the game and players. It appears your perspective is binary, I suggest it is more every man/woman for himself. People pick "teams" based on individual issues in context of their best interests - this is dynamic has been always will be. The day after the election for me and everyone else who voted was the same as the day before the election in theoretical context. So, who was on what side and what was the consequence? What is the same is the concept of people acting in a manner they believe is consistent with their best interests. Are you really looking at these issues as simplistically as your posts suggests?

What? Even given your assumptions, are you suggesting that even a hypocrite would not need to be taken seriously? Isn't the correlation between seriousness/power rather than seriousness/consistency?

There is a simple answer to these so called Israeli massacres. Everything else is political showmanship.

 

it's empirically false to say that people associate with a political ideology that serves their best interests. you are yourself a prime example of someone who does not do that.

second, ace...you supported the iraq war. so you don't care about being deceived: all you care about is who is doing it. you have no ethical position. so there's nothing to discuss.