Lies,Lies, and Damn lies: Obama blames Benghazi on Congress

During Rose Garden press conference, Obama refuses to apologize for secretly seizing AP phone records, shifts blame to Congress for Benghazi security lapses, and dodges question about White House IRS knowledge.

That headline was a tad too long to fit in a forum heading so forgive my improvisation. Thread topic is about 'blaming congress for Benghazi security lapses'.

President Barack Obama dodged questions Thursday about the IRS's targeting of conservative groups, shifted responsibility for the Benghazi attack to Congress, and said 'I offer no apologies' for the Department of Justice's secret seizure of reporter's phone records in search of a classified intelligence leak.

www.dailymail.co.uk... lame-Congress-Benghazi-security-lapses-dodges-question-White-House-IRS-knowledge.html

So where does one start here?

Was congress the one who decided to go bomb Libya after 30 years of silence?

No.

Was congress the one who was going around 'arming other embassies' with Chevy volts?

No.

In fact there is little difference between Obama, and Boxers comments.

It takes funding to protect an embassy. It takes funding to protect a consulate. It takes funding to protect an outpost. Yes, it takes funding. Who cut the funds from embassy security? The Republicans in the House, that is who — hundreds of millions of dollars. If it were not for the Democrats, it would have been cut more, because when it came here, we stood our ground. We had to accommodate their cuts. That is how the process works. So I think the Benghazi ‘scandal’ starts with the Republicans looking in the mirror. Mirror mirror, who is the fairest of them all? They ought to ask: Mirror, mirror, who cut the funding for diplomatic security across this world for America? The answer: Republicans.

www.washingtonpost.com... 7d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html

So 'It's all the republicans fault eh?

Guess that settles that it's all the 'republicans' fault!!!

Well that is a lie because I wasn't aware that the person(who was in charge of the state department) who said "We came,We saw, Gaddafi died), and the guy who said (let's go bomb Libya) were republicans.

In fact neither Obama or Clinton are 'republicans' ok well they sure are acting like them with the neoconish ways of spreading 'freedom, and democracy' in the ME.

Time for the facts:

Politicians often play games with budget numbers, and so one must be careful at accepting numbers at face value. Note how Boxer asserted that House Republicans “sought to cut more than $450 million from President Obama’s budget request.” That means she is talking about the president’s proposed budget — which in any administration is often a pie-in-the-sky document.

That's true a budget is just a number that is often thrown out there that has little to do with 'real need' that extends to any government budget.

In fact, the Congressional Research Service has documented that Congress, whether led by Democrats and Republicans, year after year did not fully fund the various pots of money for embassy security. (See page 25.) The State Department, for instance, was shortchanged by $142 million in fiscal year 2010, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.

What's that?

Both Houses?

Moreover, while Boxer claims that Republicans “cut” the budget, she is only comparing it to what the Obama administration proposed. The reality is that funding for embassy security has increased significantly in recent years.

There it is.

Benghazi was not over money, you would think that security would be paramount after you(the current administration) bombed the hell out of, and killed their leader.

But nope just blame congress, ok really just the righties of congress, because god knows the current administration is not responsible for anything they do.

Although the State Department with it's 'Insufficient Funds' sure had enough to push alternative energy by sending other embassies Chevy volts.

People wake up and smell what is being shoveled.

Leaders find solutions to problems and assign responsibility for failure.

Followers find excuses to problems and assign blame for failure.

We need a leader, not a follower in the Oval Office. If not him, then who? That IS the very definition of the Presidency. To lead our nation and all agencies under the control of the Executive Branch.

Blaming Congress makes a weak position look even weaker. Perhaps Congress DOES share blame in the end? It does absolutely nothing to mitigate or change the blame already earned by those under his command and control. I think he needs to clean HIS house for a change...and wait until that's done before telling others about how they have dirty floors too.

Man .. he's just trying to blame anyone and everyone ... throwing mud all over the place and seeing what will stick. I wonder if the pet peacock (MSNBC) will try to run with this latest bunch of hooooooey.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Perhaps Congress DOES share blame in the end?

Don't think so what happened in Benghazi was a result of failed foreign policy decisions, and those calls are made in the oval office, and by it's mouthpiece the state department.

reply to post by neo96

Oh, I'm looking at 6+ months of systematic failure from the State Dept to the Diplomatic Security Service to the White House to Congressional Oversight ...that seems to be overseeing their own political future far more than anything related to the good of a nation.

I think there is plenty of blame to share, personally. I just don't think anyone involved ought to be allowed to weasel out of their share of it...especially by pointing to others as if on a grade school playground. That's what he strikes me as doing here.

Obama this and Obama that. Distraction, distraction, distraction. Now, i know why we'll never know the truth about history. It keeps getting buried in distraction. Can we solve 1 crime, before we try to solve the next?

Originally posted by WonderBoi
Can we solve 1 crime, before we try to solve the next?

That would be great ... but Obama and Holder keep pumping them out faster than we can keep up with them. Gotta' learn to multi-task when it comes to keeping up with corrupt politicians.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by WonderBoi
Can we solve 1 crime, before we try to solve the next?

That would be great ... but Obama and Holder keep pumping them out faster than we can keep up with them. Gotta' learn to multi-task when it comes to keeping up with corrupt politicians.

Is it Obama and Holder, or the puppet masters??? Those 2 are just characters in a movie. lol They're reading from a script. lmfao It's called: ACTING.

reply to post by WonderBoi


You could be right...in which case, I think it's time to fire the actors and get new ones. They stink at it.

Let's just hold a national raffle ... We could't do much worse by pure random chance.

Why would he not just come out and say he has the authority to do what ever he wants without congressional approval?

[107th Congress Public Law 40]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


[DOCID: f:publ040.107]

[[Page 115 STAT. 224]]

Public Law 107-40
107th Congress

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those
responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United
States.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were
committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the
United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect
United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence;
and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat
to the national security and foreign policy of the United States;
and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take
action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against
the United States: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Authorization for Use of
Military Force''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--That the President is
authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those
nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized,
committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any
future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such
nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.

[[Page 115 STAT. 225]]

(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.

Approved September 18, 2001.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S.J. Res. 23 (H.J. Res. 64):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):
Sept. 14, considered and passed Senate and House.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 37 (2001):
Sept. 18, Presidential statement.

gpo.gov

wikipedia

The Authorization for Use of Military Force[1] (AUMF) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.

1.) Could the Benghazi murders be avoided?

No. Because America does not control the terrorists, nor does the Libyan govt.


2. ) If America had opted out of UN resolution to wage war upon Gaddafi, would the ambassador's life be saved?

No. Radical militants will always blame USA either for helping or NOT helping, and targetting america, as it is the most powerful nation on Earth. Challenge the top, and those below will bow. Terrorists are only animals and think like animats that they are.


3.) Is Congress to be blamed for the continued farce about Benghazi when the country has more CRITICAL issues to resolve?

Most definately. It's a hell of a time to get moving on. Focus on finding the murderers, not trying to hope for a scandal to tear down the presidency whom was elected by the Majority. There are far more PRESSING issues upon americans, than an event that had already occured and can no longer be changed.

I can understand the extremist Tea party whom will put President Obama on the rack if he so much as accidently took a pen from a student seeking autographs when suddenly he had to attend to a major incident, with that pen.

'It's the principle, not the value' - the extremist Tea party will rant, and Republican join in as they are a vote bank and the opposition. Only human nature at work.

But the republicans CANNOT BE FORGIVEN if it continues on this destructive egoistical path to destroy the opposition - democrats, when there are far more critical issues to be resolved such as the economy and social expenditure to put every american back on his/her feet.

Elected representatives have an obligation to its elected and the majority of the american people, not to the party alone.

The Tea party are extremists and are only idiots well known by the majority. The Tea party hates the President and will do anything, even lie through their mouth to fool others, if it can get President Obama off his seat. This INSANITY has got to end. Tea party members are americans too, and need not go down this destructive path, out of petty emotions when the nation needs everyone to work together to resolve for more bigger issues than personal petty ones.

Hmmmm:



'Tough ethic's laws'

Too rich.

reply to post by neo96

No no no. He got it all wrong.

It is Bush's fault.

Geez, even this Redneck knows that.........

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


You are incorrect.

It could have been avoided, if 0bama hadn't had them there, running missiles/guns/arms.

When has Obama EVER been accountable for ANY failure?

He only gloms onto successes of others.

A weak and pitiful man, Obama is.

reply to post by beezzer


Look at his past voting record. Either present or not there.

He is the Artful Dodger.

reply to post by neo96


Seems to be pretty convienent that the GOP cuts funding to security and then uses a lack of security as a reason to hammer Obama.

That sounds like they designed the entire strategy.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

1.) Could the Benghazi murders be avoided?

I think so as already said nothing out of Libya for 30+ years

2. ) If America had opted out of UN resolution to wage war upon Gaddafi, would the ambassador's life be saved?

Had America put boots on the ground instead of 'leading from behind' instead the current administration chose a cowards way of fighting 'death from above'.

4 Americans might still be alive

3.) Is Congress to be blamed for the continued farce about Benghazi when the country has more CRITICAL issues to resolve?

Seems to me the only people interested in getting to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi is congress which says everything there is about the current administration.

I can understand the extremist Tea party whom will put President Obama on the rack if he so much as accidently took a pen from a student seeking autographs when suddenly he had to attend to a major incident, with that pen.

Political trolling

'It's the principle, not the value' - the extremist Tea party will rant, and Republican join in as they are a vote bank and the opposition. Only human nature at work.

More political trolling

But the republicans CANNOT BE FORGIVEN if it continues on this destructive egoistical path to destroy the opposition - democrats, when there are far more critical issues to be resolved such as the economy and social expenditure to put every american back on his/her feet.

What can not be forgiven is those who betrayed their oath for protect this nation from all enemies in this case FOREIGN, and left Americans to die.

Elected representatives have an obligation to its elected and the majority of the american people, not to the party alone.

That means the current administration right?

The Tea party are extremists and are only idiots well known by the majority. The Tea party hates the President and will do anything, even lie through their mouth to fool others, if it can get President Obama off his seat. This INSANITY has got to end. Tea party members are americans too, and need not go down this destructive path, out of petty emotions when the nation needs everyone to work together to resolve for more bigger issues than personal petty ones.

More political trolling.

Originally posted by beezzer
When has Obama EVER been accountable for ANY failure?

He only gloms onto successes of others.

A weak and pitiful man, Obama is.

What a weak and pathetic spot of propaganda

Originally posted by cholo
reply to post by neo96

 

Seems to be pretty convienent that the GOP cuts funding to security and then uses a lack of security as a reason to hammer Obama.

That sounds like they designed the entire strategy.

Deflection: FAIL

Who, in the Whitehouse, canceled the 2 attempts to rescue the staff or attack the terrorists?