Chris Matthews accepts Democratic loss of Senate.

Gryphon66
reply to post by oblvion

 

Sooo ... it's your position that, even though the facts don't align with your opinion of what happened in Benghazi, American servicemen and women across the world have lost heart because of ... something that you're not certain really happened, but believe because it fits in with your dislike/hatred of President Obama.

Got it. I hope you're wrong. What these men and women face everyday is more than enough, without having this kind of baseless propaganda spread back home.

We are still at war. There was a time when it was considered treasonous to publish poppycock like this in wartime.

But those rules don't apply, anymore, it seems.

edit on 14Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:34:04 -050014p022014366 by Gryphon66 because: Switched positions of two posts to make more logical sense.

poppycock like a vid was the responsible party for the attack?

you tell us WHAT happened in benghazi.

yeah, once upon a time....

Gryphon66
reply to post by oblvion

 

I'd be glad to discuss anything logically, anytime.

Don't claim that my logic is faulty merely because you disagree with my positions.

I have to say though, our world-views are at 180 degree logger-heads; we probably wouldn't get anywhere.

Fox, Rush, Hannity, Beck, Coulter, et. al. push the most inane, error-filled, misleading, baseless, divisive BS I've ever heard.

MSNBC, HuffPo, yeah ... pretty much Democrat-oriented. But even their spin is NOTHING compared with Fox.

But NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN ... nah, they're just in it for the money these days. Fairly innocuous.

Oh, there was OUTRAGE a plenty over Beirut ... but we didn't try to hang it on President Reagan's neck.

He was a flawed man, I despised his policies, but he was the President.

Obama has not gotten even a partial recognition of the honor accompanying the Office ... even from Day 1 from your side of the spectrum. He's not that great a President, given, but he's not the Tyrant-Kenyan-Communist-Overlord the Right has made him out to be, either.

Best.

edit on 14Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:34:35 -050014p022014366 by Gryphon66 because: Switched positions.

yeah so where do u get your facts?

just make them up or what?

are you an investigative reporter working on your own?

Gryphon66

hounddoghowlie
well i think the dummiecrats are running scared and see the win by jolly in florida as a omen. even if it was a house election

Fla. loss a blow to Democrats' 2014 hopes Read more: thehill.com...

2014 Preview: Republican tops Democrat in Fla. election on jobs, economy message

many more articles from sources that have whatever flavor you like right ,left dem, rep, lib or whatever, saying basically the same thing.

then you add the mess that reid has stepped into. and seeing that he just did win last time.
thanks to Xcathdra for bringing this to the boards.EXCLUSIVE: FBI blocked in corruption probe involving Sens. Reid, Lee

then add all the back peddling that the dummies are doing, and how obuma keeps changing things in the obumacare fiasco.
it's plain to see they are worried and that the people are waking up to the BS they are pushing.

yep i think they hear the toll of the death bells, and know that their ride is over.

edit on 14-3-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

All brought to you by ... the same delusional groups that claimed a Romney/Ryan landslide ... until Election Night.

even a broken clock is right 2 times a day. right?

what is the opposite of right? wrong?

lol!

Gryphon66

BrianFlanders

At any rate, you don't pass a law that requires every American to buy something and tell your opposition they should offer a better plan if they don't like it. We had a better plan ever since the founding of this country. The right to choose not to buy into the insurance racket.

You're speaking in generalities that are impossible to address with the facts.

However, I'll wander into the field of "what if" with you. Why didn't the Republicans offer a plan which dealt with the very clear issues with our insurance/healthcare system over the last 15 years? Why didn't the Republicans work WITH the Democrats to achieve changes to the ACA more in line with what they felt was best for their constituency?

What is the answer to continually increasing insurance costs and medical costs?
What is the answer to 50 million Americans with no health insurance?
How is it better for the uninsured to wait until they are so sick they have to go to an Emergency Room for indigent treatment that directly affect the costs that all of us pay for care?

ACA is a horrible law. Where is the Republican alternative? Is the Republican alternative simply "no"?

Is that an acceptable answer?

ya, hey, has that 50 mil got insurance now?

there were plenty of alternatives that the pubs recommended.

why blame repubs when your whole world failed?

tsingtao:

Yes, yes, you disagree with several of my posts with some cute quips in lieu of facts; thanks for playing. You could have established that in one post.

If you're really interested in information about the matter, rather than merely what you've been listening to on Fox news and the Right-wing echo chamber, lo these many months, may I recommend this article? A Deadly Mix in Benghazi

Or this one? Five Biggest Republican Lies about Benghazi

Or perhaps here? State Department Accountability Review

I'll hazard a guess and go ahead and answer for you, that all these reports are merely the result of the "liberal media" lying for the Administration and that nothing except what is reported on Fox News is truth.

ADDED IN EDIT:

Ah, you're still trying to dredge up something ... well, we're a heck of a lot closer to having these folks insured than we were, no thanks to any Republican, anywhere:

Obamacare Signups Increase - Surge to 4.2 Million in February

Major Vindication for Obamacare - Increasing Coverage while Reducing Cost

Obamacare Signups Boom -Bloomburg

Etc. Etc.

But again, this isn't Fox News, so it's suspect. Right?

/eyeroll

reply to post by Gryphon66



i guess you are serious. lol.

like i said, do you do your own investigations?

the msm is good enough for you, right?


hillary and obama is the blame for benghazi.

their guys were killed, no one has been caught and you people brush it off like it happens everyday.

reply to post by Gryphon66

If you're really interested in information about the matter, rather than merely what you've been listening to on Fox news and the Right-wing echo chamber

It's just a thought here...but we could move beyond ALL MSM and both the right as well as left wing propaganda on this matter to simply read what actually happened, report by report and in their own original words. It's where the media ought to have been starting, not skipping to spin right and left respectively.

121 Pages of original cables, reports and security assessments

45 Pages of photos from the pre-attack Benghazi compound and previous attack on it

it's a lot of material to get through, but the URL's are both the United States House of Representatives in terms of being as source as that term tends to get on things. It's quite a bit more than the MSM has ever dared or cared to bother reporting.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


May we assume you've reviewed the information, as you're presenting it, wrabbit?

What conclusions are you finding that are different than one side or the other of the so-called spin machine?

I haven't made an exhaustive study, but I'll be glad to share what I've found first:

1. The Security staffing in the Benghazi diplomatic compound was woefully insufficient.

2. This may or may not be directly related to budget cutbacks imposed by the House for security personnel, world-wide.

3. There were multiple warnings produced by our intelligence groups that violence was incipient. However, this kind of chatter always exists in these types of tense situations.

4. Mistakes in judgement were made on the ground by various lower-grade State Department officials, at least as seen in retrospect. However, the fact that these folks were in many ways hobbled by House budget cuts must also be taken into account.

5. Secretary Clinton was "ultimately" responsible for the actions (or inactions) of the State Department, and President Obama was ultimately responsible for hers. However, despite months and months and months of the best efforts of partisan attacks, there has been no clear evidence of any direct wrong-doing on the part of either Clinton or Obama.

6. If President Obama were responsible for even a tenth of what he is accused of, in regard to Benghazi or in many other cases, the Republicans would be filing Impeachment every day, of every week, of every month, until they got it. The fact that it might not get through the Senate for partisan reasons wouldn't stop them for a second ... IF THEY HAD ANY PROOF OF WRONGDOING.

That's what I think, Wrabbit ... what do you find to be true?

reply to post by Gryphon66


Well, first of all, this isn't a partisan issue to me. 4 Americans died here and that must be accounted for. One of those was a personal and direct representative of the United States President. That is no small thing and few rank equal or above a U.S. Ambassador for importance and symbolism, no matter who they are as an individual.

Second on this, I will agree, to the dismay of some I'm sure...Obama didn't cause this. I don't know about his complicity that NIGHT...but what made this happen was far more than one day or one night's events. This was the culmination, as you can read in those original papers and cables to and from Benghazi, Tripoli and Washington back to December of 2011, this was a train wreck with many conductors....but none at the top executive level. We give our Presidents TOO much credit at times for being able, in a sheer physical sense, to know half what we think they do.

Having said that? The AFTERMATH absolutely IS Obama's baby and it'll be his baby long after he leaves office. Men like me will insure that, as letters and inquiries will never..ever...stop. Never. Not as long as I have energy to use a keyboard...and there are millions like me, equally resolute to find out how this could have been allowed.

----

There is a VERY VERY large detail contained in that pack of original material you have missed. The majority of people do, and it's nothing to wonder about. The media, that I've heard, have never mentioned it. Not one single time...in this context anyway. Damn sure not in the way it would place context to what did happen that night and what this was all quite possibly about from start to finish. It's not THAT hard a puzzle to ponder, if one has all the pieces. it too, isn't Obama's baby in any sense that would explain blaming him ...until the aftermath and lies about Youtube videos and spontaneous protests began.

I'd really encourage you to check what I posted there...as details matter and I'd give anything if media would just be friggin honest on this one and report what is sitting on the table in plain view, thanks to Congress having posted that material in a backwater area of their servers for public download.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I'm reading through it now, Wrabbit, and will continue before I say anything else on the matter. I had been looking for this kind of factual information in lieu of the "he said she said" available via most media reports.

Thank you, as usual, for your clarity and candor; it's always a joy to communicate.

reply to post by Gryphon66


No problem..and I'm not being coy or playing games about what I said sits in the middle of all that. You'll have *NO* doubt when you find it, for the bells it sets off like a 5 Alarm fire. I think you'll appreciate context and importance of the different moving parts immediately.


If not..I'll drop a note tomorrow because I don't do mystery stuff..but did want to give a chance to have that Ah-Ha! moment as I did when I'd first read that stuff top to bottom.

Snarl
reply to post by oblvion

 

I dont follow any party lines on any subject.

I know you like the back of my own hand!! LOL

When are we gonna stand up and get Our voices heard? Maybe after wealth is removed from the election equation.

If only man, it would be nice to have a politician you could trust, even if it were words you didnt like hearing, at least they would be true.

I turn 36 on the 23rd, I am now old enough to run for POTUS.

Everyone vote for me, I will not always do what you guys want, as I cant please everyone at the same time.

But I will always do what I honestly believe to be right, and I will not lie to you.

I will tell you all the economy is crap, and it doesnt look to be improving much in the near future.

We will weather the storm though, because we are strong as a people, and we do have greatness deep down inside, we just have to work our arses off until we bring it back out.

I will balance the budget, because I will veto anything that comes across my desk that has a single ounce of pork. It is actually easy to balance the budget and wipe out the national dept, it can be done in less than 8 years in fact without cutting anything. All we would have to do is freeze spending, at its current level and not raise it. The growth of our economy would by itself pay all this crap off in I believe the number is 6 years, but I will say 8 to be sure.

After the economy is back on track, and my 2 terms are up, I hope you guys will then elect either Beezer, BFFT, Wrabbit, Boncho, Tothetenth or snarl here.

All have shown extremely advanced critical thinking skills, and though I dont always agree with any of them, I feel all would truly do their best to take care of Americas problems, in the good faith that the people have placed in their leaders.

After say 4 terms of actually responsible folks running the show.......my lord, it could be like the 50's all over again.

Everyone buying a new car, everyone having disposable income, a booming economy.......

Oh ya one more thing, I would bring actual class back to the White House. You guys know what I mean, not "thug life, bling bling" class. The real kind, the kind that cant be bought. This has been absent since Reagan left, Old slick Willy was close, he actually had class, too bad he was a douche bag sometimes too though. But then arent we all sometimes.

reply to post by Gryphon66


Yes they have a sworn duty, but it is not to pass laws. Talk about my use of logic....

They said no, because there is not anything that can be done but one simple solution, that both parties wouldnt touch, because their special interest masters forbid from even trying.\


Here I will solve all the problems Obamacare was supposed to address but failed without reservation in all areas.

Here it is...you ready......it is going to shock you.......you wont believe how complex this is.......

Allow insurance to be sold across state lines..........Problem solved, in only 8 words.....Game set match.

There were many little monopolies set all over the country, where the people in each area were hamstrung, they didnt have choice, there was no competition to drive down prices, so they necessarily skyrocketed, as they had a captive audience with no other choice.

some of your other points had merit, but meh, not really worth commenting on for me. I said what I had to say, you got to have your counter point.

I will just let ATS weigh them out on their own.

Gryphon66

BrianFlanders

At any rate, you don't pass a law that requires every American to buy something and tell your opposition they should offer a better plan if they don't like it. We had a better plan ever since the founding of this country. The right to choose not to buy into the insurance racket.

You're speaking in generalities that are impossible to address with the facts.

However, I'll wander into the field of "what if" with you. Why didn't the Republicans offer a plan which dealt with the very clear issues with our insurance/healthcare system over the last 15 years? Why didn't the Republicans work WITH the Democrats to achieve changes to the ACA more in line with what they felt was best for their constituency?

What is the answer to continually increasing insurance costs and medical costs?
What is the answer to 50 million Americans with no health insurance?
How is it better for the uninsured to wait until they are so sick they have to go to an Emergency Room for indigent treatment that directly affect the costs that all of us pay for care?

ACA is a horrible law. Where is the Republican alternative? Is the Republican alternative simply "no"?

Is that an acceptable answer?

Are you honestly saying a horrible law that does more harm than good is better than nothing at all?

I think I will take nothing over being worse off than I would be without it.

tsingtao

Gryphon66

oblvion

Obama has taken that assurance away from our soldiers, it is like a true and sacred trust, it can never be violated, because once it is, it is next to impossible to get it back.

First of all, thank you for your service.

You're pointing to Benghazi as the moment when Obama "took the assurance away from our soldiers"?

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the President DIRECTLY ordered that operatives and Marines be "left behind."

(He didn't.)

Are you saying this one act would completely undermine, for now and all time, all confidence "no one gets left behind" that one soldier has in his buddies? That all duty and faithfulness has been utterly eradicated from our fighting men and women?

I don't believe you're correct in that assessment, no disrespect.

edit on 10Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:55:25 -050014p102014366 by Gryphon66 because: Better phrasing

it was under his watch as commander in chief!!

hillary was stevens boss.

it was her that f'd up and obama is her boss!

nothing was done to get there. at all!

the gd reporters were there before the military.

if the dems can't see how screwed that is, then they don't deserve to be anywhere near our military.

All I can say is, I wish you were here, I would buy you a beer!!!

Gryphon66
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

I'm reading through it now, Wrabbit, and will continue before I say anything else on the matter. I had been looking for this kind of factual information in lieu of the "he said she said" available via most media reports.

Thank you, as usual, for your clarity and candor; it's always a joy to communicate.

Yes Wrabbit...he is a constant voice of reason, and literal plethora of useful knowledge. He somehow seems to always have the links you want to things you cant find.

And always seems to show up at the right time with said links and knowledge.

oblvion
reply to post by Gryphon66

 

Yes they have a sworn duty, but it is not to pass laws. Talk about my use of logic....

Yeah, diametrically opposing world-views ... and pointless because your constant claim is that disagreement with you is illogical by definition.

I'm done, except to answer this silliness above.

What ARE the duties of a member Congress? Let's look to the Constitution, first.

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3

Okay then, what does the Oath say?

§3331. Oath of office
An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.
(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 424.)

But what are the duties then?

The duties carried out by a Member of Congress are understood to include representation, legislation, and constituent service and education, as well as political and electoral activities.

Source - Roles and Duties of a Member of Congress:

So, surprise surprise, the job of a LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE is to REPRESENT AND MAKE LAW.

LEGIS = LAW

This is basic American Civics. Now, as I'm certain that you will add quippy meaningless commentary, try to discredit sources, or bring in your own "amazing, infallible logic" I'm done with this particular scenario.

The facts are clear on the point.

You and the Amen Corner have fun, eh?

reply to post by Gryphon66


Wow...just...wow....ok, where to begin......

First off, I am not religious, at all, so me and the "amen corner" will not have much to talk about, seeing how I do believe and have stated at least 100 times on these boards about how religion has caused way more harm than good for humanity, in 99 out of 100 cases...but I digress.

Maybe you should not assume so much, your making an ASS out U and ME.

The sworn duty of congress is not to pass laws, especially not on a whim, with little to no debate, with little to no opposing input.

Their PRIMARY duty is to represent, not legislate. Legislation is one of their last and least important roles, which is why it was placed so far down the structure of their oath. If it were their most important task, it would have been placed at the very top, not the very bottom.

Their mandate goes in order of importance from first to last in the statement. Passing laws being one of their last and least important duties.

You are assuming to much way to often, like your assuming passing ACA is better than doing nothing, even though it took a bad situation and made it much worse.

As of yesterday from what I have been researching, most of the same 50 million without insurance will still be uninsured, and all will be paying more than before it passed, along with a tax just for living in America on all, just for living.

The entire premise was to make the unaffordable for so many, affordable, but the law has not done that, it made it much much much more expensive for all, and is going to cost the already severely over taxed even more to pay for it.

In short it is a # sandwich, it is a football bat...it is worth less than nothing as it actually deducts from what people had at the start. Is a a negative impact on all across the board, save the very few who have preexisting conditions. This is the only thing about it that is actually a good idea, and it doesnt even do that well.

I never said your illogical because you disagree with me. Wrabbit and many others do it all the time actually. It is perfectly logical to disagree, but it is illogical to do so when your using illogical arguments to try and back up your views.

I said your illogical because the arguments you try to make dont follow a clear and defined path of logical progression.

Hence my many stars and your like 7 in this thread.

I am not saying stars make me right, I am saying those stars represent other members agreeing with my use of logic, and your lack of said stars represents your lack of said logic, because other members cant follow your line of thinking.

No it isnt a failure on their part, it is a failure on your part to either use logic ( which it seems to me to be the case) or to properly articulate your side in a way that doesnt take and make great leaps and bounds of reason, but spells out the step by step logical progression of your thoughts.

Maybe your right and I am wrong, wont be the first time honestly, and I am simply making my point more clearly than you are.

If this is the case, please dont stop, keep debating, your skills will improve over time, and you will be better able to articulate your thoughts.

When I first joined ATS I already had debate club etc.. under my belt, so I know how to put my points across clearly, and in a particular fashion that others can see the clear trail of crumbs I left behind so they can follow my foot steps to retrace my path.

I dont want you to submit and accept my side, I want you to clearly see where I am coming from, and either find my side wanting, or agree my stance has merit, based on an established chain of logic that can be followed easily from start to end.

It is Saint Patty's weekend BTW...the beer is on me man, enjoy

I did say I'd get back on this today if you hadn't found one of the more critical pieces to the overall puzzle yet. I'm just outraged that all this time has passed and they still play like "Geee.... I dunno what could have gotten into them to do this..huh? why?"

(sigh) ... They damn well know why or have a VERY good reason to deduce what this was about and it damn sure wasn't any youtube video. They knew THAT months before Stevens died...and that, in the end, is the point. The failure here wasn't Barack Obama. Although his leadership style has fed a loosey goosey culture among his cabinet departments that sure contributed to it.

No...This isn't so simple or easy as 'Get 'em!!' while aiming all political guns at the White House. 4 men were murdered that night, waiting and calling for help that would never come and would never even move to attempt to come...until much later, when it was all over and done. That was an ending to a production of total and abject failure which took MANY people to produce. MANY CAREER people still sitting at desks of authority at State. Perhaps even promoted by now.

The blood of those 4 Americans rests inside and within State, Hillary Clinton and the Middle Management she directly and personally led by position to have told those people to make do with the local militia. Yeah..... Dandy.... The local militia. Let's consider that suggestion of ultimate fail.

Here are a few early and less lethal examples of BAD... (These are caps from the US Government document collection off the House of Reps website. That matters to mention in them being entirely public domain by the nature of the source and using them)



Believe it or not, the one on the left is actually the better of the two for talking about the local guard force they were forced to 'make do' with. The one on the right saw them outright abandon their posts and run. Comforting ..using local militia.














This capture comes from page 46 and outlines what staffing SHOULD have existed. However, the first several pages of the PDF are communciations back and forth between Stevens in Benghazi and Tripoli and/or Washington indicating the cut from 5 agents to 2 for a bare minimum greatly reduced their ability to even function, much less maintain security.


There are also requirements around page 59 (PDF pages) that outline, under law, what must exist for things like Perimeter setback and basic security layout. Take a look at the pictures in the links I supplied above and tell me how many look to be fulfilled. The law states ONLY the Secretary of State may waiver those requirements. Benghazi was on a lease of $70,000 US per month, I believe I'd seen in there...and strict conditions we actually agreed to in choosing this property which radically limited physical security options. Criminally so, IMO.

The problem is..this was known and ongoing for nearly a year before hand. Things like these...weren't uncommon..



As you can see. When they didn't just steal our stuff and that of the other diplomatic missions, they were happy to throw some bombs at them and give it a good college try at blowing up the international presence in Benghazi.







This the big one though, and you can find more detailed reports on it if you chose to look, but the SitRep for that day sums it up quite nicely. The photo set linked in a previous post also shows the truck clearly. Such eagle eyed guards we had...I'm just staggered at their professionalism.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/xa532475ce.gif[/atsimg]

Pay particular attention to what the group named themselves....and think back. That man has been housed within a short distance of where I live...for all the comfort that brought to see just how openly and determined they were to convey the message of what they wanted from us, and how they'd go about getting it. Our Militia guards, right there the whole time of course...watching the bomb placed, watching the guy casually walk away and then watching it blow up after he drove away.

You just can't find help like that very often. (Thank God....more would be dead, otherwise)


Accountability needs to be had and to get right back around to topic here......If the Congress changes hands, it'll be in part due to just HOW SICK people are of crap like the above and the run around for ANY kind of straight answer to why our people died asking for help...that would never come. Help...that would never even move to start coming.

121 Pages of original cables, reports and security assessments

45 Pages of photos from the pre-attack Benghazi compound and previous attack on it

reply to post by muse7


I disagree. I think the democrats have gone too far and people are seeing their true colors. I think the Senate will be taken by Republicans and the presidency will be won by a Neocon Christie or Bush. It will be a complete rightwing rule. It can go bad or good depending if the Tea Party uprising can overtake the GOP establishment characters like McCain, Graham, and McConnel. Then the neocons would be forced to work with the Tea Party.