GOP responsible for cutting State Dept. Security overseas - including the Benghazi, Libya, consulate

reply to post by MrInquisitive


How many Obama phones would it take to send soldiers to Benghazi?
Why couldn't Obama remove some soldiers in Bumbuttistan and move them to Benghazi?
Questions, blame, questions, blame, etc., etc, etc.

Bravo!!! On your pointing out the reality of "where things are"..........it's amazing how folks stay true to their party when their party is quite obviously as flawed as perhaps ourselves...........The lies, deceit and all related coming from BOTH parties today is alarming......I suppose we need to decide which one's are more alarming....

Here's an article that does a good job of explaining the State Dept budget deal..

Executive branch asks for this much..

House proposes less

Senate proposes a bit more than the House but less than what the Executive branch asked for..

It is agreed upon by the Congress..

This sounds like how the Congress should be conducting themselves trying to balance wants and needs in the current economic climate..

Toss out the partisanship that unfortunately is full attack mode, and I see the legislative and executive branch actually doing what they are supposed to do, which was quite refreshing.

thehill.com...

I cannot blame the House, Senate even the Oval Office (though responsibility is ultimately theirs)..

I place the blame for the Libya assassination of the US diplomat where it belongs.. the State department..

LOL....,

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Obama should have found enough money for staffing? So he should go out and violate the spirit of the GOP cuts, and do it anyway?

Why not, he has done it with everything else out there.
Are you suggesting that he abides by the laws set???

And please, spare us the retorts that Bush did something.
The topic at hand is the current issue, not what Bush did.

Did I mention Bush? Discrete hint...if you're working off a playbook, you shouldn't telegraph the fact, eh?

Seriously?

Blame the Gop?

Who was the guy who put us in Libya?

Wasn't Bush, Wasn't the Gop.

reply to post by PvtHudson


Not to mention, that the people in charge........instead of increasing the number of people in Benghazi , gave the people there a RAISE........

Whose fault is that? GOP?

If the OP actually watched the whole hearing, he would know, that it was admitted that they had the money AND the resources to increase security.......

THEY JUST REFUSED TO

Cant blame THAT on the GOP

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Obama should have found enough money for staffing? So he should go out and violate the spirit of the GOP cuts, and do it anyway?

Why not, he has done it with everything else out there.
Are you suggesting that he abides by the laws set???

And please, spare us the retorts that Bush did something.
The topic at hand is the current issue, not what Bush did.

Did I mention Bush? Discrete hint...if you're working off a playbook, you shouldn't telegraph the fact, eh?

edit on 11-10-2012 by JohnnyCanuck because: ...just because...ok?

That is the key. I took care of that possible retort before it was typed.
So......................................................
0bama has violated the law all the way to today, why should he stop?

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

I'm dazzled by the amount of deflection that this thread is generating. Civilised nations have embassies. Period. Obama should have found enough money for staffing? So he should go out and violate the spirit of the GOP cuts, and do it anyway? Is it that easy for the Right to talk out of both sides of their mouths?

Guess so.

Yes, it's amazing how the right-wingers will say anything to deflect from the facts of the matter. The facts are the GOP caused the State Dept budget for security to be cut and that will degrade security. They also expect that each and every terror advisory will cause cause extra-special care to be taken at each and every embassy and consulate and they assume the State Department is psychic or has 100% intelligence and knows exactly which facility is in danger, and that every extra measure should be taken for this one facility -- expenses and budget be damned. Never mind that they keep saying it was the US embassy when it was in fact a consulate, a lower-level diplomatic facility, so they don't even know what they are talking about.

It's just more typical right-wing rhetoric: ignorance, laying the blame on political opponents, completely disregarding the inconvenient facts and parroting of the right-wing echo chamber talking points. Never mind that a GOP congressman has admitted that the State Department security budget was by a Republican-controlled House.

One post even says the Clinton administration cut embassy security too, but that Bush increased it. Where did that come from? I never heard anything about that. I don't doubt Bush increased security after 9/11, but certainly not before. Do these folks know that the US embassy in Pakistan was bombed during the Reagan administration?

These right-wing posters also don't address IN ANY MANNER my additional point that they don't criticize Republican presidents for their mistakes. I provided a big long list of them too. Guess they can't refute them. Big surprise.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
"Mistakes were made." Made by who? Made by the Bush administration and its lackeys.

Oh gawd ... so Benghazi-gate is somehow Bush's fault?

You do realize Bush left office 4 years ago .. right? You do realize that it's the responsibility of the State Dept (Hillary) to keep our diplomatic staff safe, right? Ugh .. 'Bush's fault' ...

Geez, you conservatives are addle-brained and lacking reading comprehension skills.

blah blah off topic childish insults blah blah

No, I did not in anyway claim that Bush was responsible for the Benghazi attacks;

I quoted you above ... 'Mistakes were made ... by the Bush administration and it's lackeys.
I read it just fine. The insinuation was it was all Bush's fault.

it was only your inability to comprehend what was written or your desire to confuse matters that makes you say otherwise.

blah blah off topic childish insults blah blah

As always, you Republicans/conservatives/Teabaggers cannot address the facts of the matter and make a coherent argument, but rather you must conflate, prevaricate and obfuscate in order to detract from the well laid-out, fact-based arguments of your opponents.

... says the perp who immediately lowered himself to off topic childish insults.

BTW .. not that it matters .. I already voted and I voted for Gary Johnson .. not Romney.
How silly of you to ASSume so much.

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Obama should have found enough money for staffing? So he should go out and violate the spirit of the GOP cuts, and do it anyway?

Why not, he has done it with everything else out there.
Are you suggesting that he abides by the laws set???


And please, spare us the retorts that Bush did something.
The topic at hand is the current issue, not what Bush did.

Please give examples where Obama has violated budget cuts. Include links to back up your point. And yes, he seems to abide by the law as the three branches of the government see it, otherwise there would be impeachment proceedings. If, he has broken some laws, please provide examples, rather than just making your unsubstantiated claims.

And sorry, charlie, but the crap Bush did incompetently or illegally is germane to this thread and meme, because one of the points of this thread is how the right-wingers criticize Obama for everything he does and what Clinton did before, but they are completely quiet about wrongs done by Republican presidents. I mentioned a number of them and so far none of you right-wing dead-enders have had legitimate counterargument to my point. I'm still waiting to read one. Again, four Americans were killed in a pre-planned terrorist attack in an unstable country overseas under the Obama administration; under the Bush administration about 3,000 US citizens were killed IN THE US, the attack resulted in the destruction of two of the three tallest buildings in the US and included a direct attack on the Pentagon -- in restricted airspace where no plane should have been allowed to fly. But right-wingers never criticized Bush for this egregious domestic security CATASTROPHE, and they supported him for a second term as president. And yes, this is quite pertinent to the witch hunt going on against Obama right now.

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
I place the blame for the Libya assassination of the US diplomat where it belongs.. the State department..

EXACTLY. That's why Hillary is scrambling to cover her backend. She knows Obama has a history of throwing people under the bus. My prediction - Susan Rice will get hammered by Obama on this.

What I find interesting about this thread is that there are some here posting partisan drivel and they throw insult after insult ... and yet the ones they are insulting did absolutely nothing to warrent it except to disagree with their posts. :shk: sad sad sad

reply to post by MrInquisitive



When all else fails…blame republicans!

Do you want to know how I know this is ridiculous (besides the fact that democrats continuously use the same tactic for every problem); because this administration would have instantly pointed this out if it was true. This is nothing but the latest in a long line of excuses for the failures in Benghazi.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
It's just more typical right-wing rhetoric: ignorance, laying the blame on political opponents, completely disregarding the inconvenient facts and parroting of the right-wing echo chamber talking points.

.... says the spouter of left-wing rhetoric: ignorance, laying the blame on political opponents, completely disregarding the incovenient facts and parroting of the left-wing echo chamber talking points.

'right wingers' 'right wingers' 'right wingers' You are so busy insulting anything that doesn't agree with you that you are off topic. Gawd .. get over the luv affair with the far left .. The far left is just as bad as the far right.

Face it. Obama's administration is responsible for Benghazi-gate.
Specifically ... Hillary's State Department is.
They screwed up. Just accept the truth of it and deal with it.

Um, so the GOP is at fault because the State Dept. refused to add security?

The GOP is at fault because of the Obama, Rice, State Dept. lies as well?

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
I place the blame for the Libya assassination of the US diplomat where it belongs.. the State department..

EXACTLY. That's why Hillary is scrambling to cover her backend. She knows Obama has a history of throwing people under the bus. My prediction - Susan Rice will get hammered by Obama on this.

What I find interesting about this thread is that there are some here posting partisan drivel and they throw insult after insult ... and yet the ones they are insulting did absolutely nothing to warrent it except to disagree with their posts. :shk: sad sad sad

absolutely, and the ones throwing the insults apparently do not want to arm themselves with the facts.....

As ive stated in another thread, I watched the whole Hearing, and a lot of things came out in teh wash in that hearing....

The problem is the defenders here dont want to aknowledge those facts, and skirt around them and return to the blame game.....

Look, To all you people blaming bush and circumventing the facts...........there has to come a time where you put down the partisan bullcrap........

See things for what they are, and decide to have a bit of honor .......what was done was wrong, the ineptitude of this administration and its willingness to let these things happen is an atrocity.....

There were so many things they could have and should have done , that could have changed this outcome are staggering and there is no excuse for that, and the blame lays squarely on these people.....

The administration ,all off them, Rice, Obama, Hilary.......all had the info given to them by Kennedy and his cronies, and he admitted that much in the hearing yesterday, and the information hes claimed he gave them did, in no uncertain terms, lead them to believe this was not out of a protest,and that it was a coordinated attack.....

There is no excuse for the spin this administration put on it except disinformation and obfuscation....

You can chose to defend the indefensable, or you can stand on the side of whats right....you know in your GUT whats right and whats wrong and what they should and shouldnt have done

....its your call

Exactly. Obama is the guy in charge. Why didn't he move extra security to Bengzi ween there were multiple warnings and signs of an attack? Why leave the SEALS there UNARMED? This is about a failure of leadership and a guy more worried about going on lap dog talk shows than doing his job.

edit on 11-10-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

I think the OP answered this...

Um...because the GOP cut the funding? Sorry, if you don't have the cash, you can't fortify your stash

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

How many Obama phones would it take to send soldiers to Benghazi?
Why couldn't Obama remove some soldiers in Bumbuttistan and move them to Benghazi?
Questions, blame, questions, blame, etc., etc, etc.

How was the State Department to know that the Benghazi consulate was in particular danger? And why is Obama personally responsible for the actions of each department of the executive branch? Seems Clinton should be criticized, if anyone in his administration should be. You seem to think that the president is omniscient and can make anything happen with a snap of the fingers. Why not address the point of this post, that the GOP-controlled House cut State Dept. security funding by hundreds of millions of dollars, thereby degrading diplomatic security worldwide? Are you claiming that this budget cut didn't degrade embassy and consulate security?

Bush got several month's warning of the 9/11 attacks and he and his administration did nothing and ignored reports by the CIA and FBI regarding Saudis on terrorist watch lists taking piloting lessons in the US. But did you criticize Bush? Well did you? Huh? I can't hear you.

You right-wing folks are upset that I posted the inconvenient fact that the GOP was responsible for decreased security for US embassies and consulates, and this could well be as much the cause for this attack succeeding as anything the Obama State Department did or didn't do. And you have no good good counterargument to refute it; all you can say is, "but, but, but Obama could've done this and should've done that" without knowing any details of the matter. It's clear that all you're trying to do is make a negative argument to not vote for Obama in a few months. And the reason your desperately doing this is because your candidate for president is so heinous that you cannot come up with positive reasons to vote for him. PATHETIC and SICKENING.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Exactly. Obama is the guy in charge. Why didn't he move extra security to Bengzi ween there were multiple warnings and signs of an attack? Why leave the SEALS there UNARMED? This is about a failure of leadership and a guy more worried about going on lap dog talk shows than doing his job.

edit on 11-10-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

I think the OP answered this...

Um...because the GOP cut the funding? Sorry, if you don't have the cash, you can't fortify your stash

Again wrong.......in the hearing they flat out said they had the resources to do this, and they denied it anyway multiple times......they even testified that they had manpower that was willing to go......

That line of thought is a cop out......if they were so short on funding why did they instead decide to give all of them a pay raise instead of making them safe?

i dunno bout you but id take not having a bullet lodged in my skull over a larger paycheck......

Try again.........

Originally posted by jimmiec
Under Bush our embassies were extremely secure. Obama/Clinton decided to do the exact opposite and have no security. Al Queda has become stronger than ever before under the current administration. Romney will have his hands full straightening the huge mess out that this administration has created. If we have war in the Middle East it will be on the Democrats heads due to their pathetic foreign policy.

You really fail on history. 12 embassies were attacked under Bush only two have been attacked under Obama. And Romney is already talking about going to war so how is that Obama's fault? If we have war in the middle east? Where the hell have you been for the last decade?