I do think Hilary did a pretty good job with the her colleagues. And is it standard policy to have every one of your accusers start out with what a great job you have been doing as Sec'y of State?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
JMO, Sec Clinton took full responsibility right after the event happened. She accepted it. There were also 3 individuals from the State Dept that stepped down because of Beneghazi.
http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/national- ... azi/nTZ84/
. As for her testimony, I believe she put it straight to the point. If one listens to the whole thing, when she says what difference does it make, she is not saying it to just blow it off, she is trying to get some of those idiots sitting on their high horse to get it through thier thick skulls that we need to learn from this, we need to make sure this never happens again.
As for the full accountability of this, not sure we will ever know. Some say nothing was said about the embassy attacks under Bush. Yet there were more Americans killed in embassy attacks under Pres Clinton's watch than Bush's watch. Here is what I found. Not that it matters, an American was killed that is bad enough.
“The fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest? Or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”
She seems to have forgotten one important "was it ...".
Does this Benghazi thing really have this much to do with this many people? Really worth this much follow up? Just seems like political showmanship. Can't change the past, I respect people died wont likely change the future. This is just a chance to make the other team look bad and make it look like way more people were involved than were. Then people that pay attention to such things should use this info the make decisions about completely unrelated things.
Seems like 1/1000000000000000th of the WMD misinformation campaign and we are not even done with that one.
I could care less about Hillary and making some team look bad. These folks have jobs to do and this cannot be the most important thing to address for the good of the nation. I know folks don't like to prioritize around here, but they have limited time and I think there are more pressing issues, we can come back to this if/when there is time.
on that note wrote: Does this Benghazi thing really have this much to do with this many people? Really worth this much follow up? Just seems like political showmanship. Can't change the past, I respect people died wont likely change the future. This is just a chance to make the other team look bad and make it look like way more people were involved than were. Then people that pay attention to such things should use this info the make decisions about completely unrelated things.
Seems like 1/1000000000000000th of the WMD misinformation campaign and we are not even done with that one.
I could care less about Hillary and making some team look bad. These folks have jobs to do and this cannot be the most important thing to address for the good of the nation. I know folks don't like to prioritize around here, but they have limited time and I think there are more pressing issues, we can come back to this if/when there is time.
archer wrote: I too am tired of the theatrics on both sides of the aisle and wish they would just concentrate on doing the nations business.
Nice platitude, but both parties disagree on how to do the nation's business. The Dems want to spend money here. The Republicans want to spend money here. The Dems want to cut these programs and the GOP wants to cut these programs.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
This is where data can come in, when we argue emotions, one side can just ramp up the argument, when we argue data, then you just look silly for ignoring it.
That is why we had a long thread where everyone said what they were worried about and just about no one was really worried about guns that would have been regulated away by ANY proposed rule.
Does anyone out there on either side really think that Bengazi or guns are the biggest thing effect the most of us? If not, then this is all bunk and Archer's comment is legit, even if you disagree with him in general.
We are still dealing with the police state that has been derived from the WMD dupe, can we talk about that, as it effects more of us. We will still be talking about that in 100 years, but Bengazi will be long gone.
on that note wrote: We are still dealing with the police state that has been derived from the WMD dupe, can we talk about that, as it effects more of us. We will still be talking about that in 100 years, but Bengazi will be long gone.
