1 edit
Former Defense Secretary Gates (first appointed by Bush).
On Face the Nation
Gates: "Difficult if not impossible" to get military assets to Benghazi in time
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he would not have approved a rushed proposal to send military assets to Benghazi to halt the September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility there, saying, "The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that."
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50146672n
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/13/robert-gates-on-benghazi-there-just-wasnt-time/
The Republicans and Fox News are such scum. And ignorant.
Originally posted by moon1969There was six months.
Former Defense Secretary Gates (first appointed by Bush).
On Face the Nation
Gates: "Difficult if not impossible" to get military assets to Benghazi in time
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he would not have approved a rushed proposal to send military assets to Benghazi to halt the September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility there ...[text shortened]... ghazi-there-just-wasnt-time/
The Republicans and Fox News are such scum. And ignorant.
Originally posted by sasquatch672The attack focus by you and other right-wing ideological hacks has been the days immediately after the attack. Get a clue. Gates disagrees with you.
There was six months.
As for the 6 months, it was the Republican-controlled House that massively cut funds for embassy security.
3 edits
UPDATE
"Why the CIA bears the main responsibility for the intelligence failures that led to the atrocity in Libya last year."
A fascinating and telling article. I've always been a fan of Patraeus and I think he will eventually come out about what happened after we nail the basterds that did the attack.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/17/truth-justice-and-benghazi.html
The sad part is that the unAmerican right-wing Republicans lie and distort and try to exploit an American tragedy and deaths for sheer political gain. Absolutely disgusting.
Quite the opposite of when Democrats and Republicans worked together after 9/11 when Bush was President.
Originally posted by moon1969A Patriot Act which granted the government powers that they never had and never should have had and two invasions and occupations which killed hundreds of thousands to little purpose.
UPDATE
"Why the CIA bears the main responsibility for the intelligence failures that led to the atrocity in Libya last year."
A fascinating and telling article. I've always been a fan of Patraeus and I think he will eventually come out about what happened after we nail the basterds that did the attack.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/ ...[text shortened]... pposite of when Democrats and Republicans worked together after 9/11 when Bush was President.
Maybe the Dems should have used the right wing playbook.
Originally posted by moon1969You mean Fox NotNews
Former Defense Secretary Gates (first appointed by Bush).
On Face the Nation
Gates: "Difficult if not impossible" to get military assets to Benghazi in time
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he would not have approved a rushed proposal to send military assets to Benghazi to halt the September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility there ...[text shortened]... ghazi-there-just-wasnt-time/
The Republicans and Fox News are such scum. And ignorant.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe Dems should have fought the Patriot Act and the wars, at least Iraq -- but not by being unAmerican as is the right-wing currently but instead by being American through open, honest, and forceful debate.
A Patriot Act which granted the government powers that they never had and never should have had and two invasions and occupations which killed hundreds of thousands to little purpose.
Maybe the Dems should have used the right wing playbook.
Originally posted by no1marauderIt's not the right's playbook, it is the progressive playbook. And guess what both parties are progressive.
A Patriot Act which granted the government powers that they never had and never should have had and two invasions and occupations which killed hundreds of thousands to little purpose.
Maybe the Dems should have used the right wing playbook.
2 edits
Originally posted by whodey🙄🙄
It's not the right's playbook, it is the progressive playbook. And guess what both parties are progressive.
Revisionist history from a right winger. The truth:
Extending the Patriot Act gets broad support from Republicans and a narrow majority of independents, but it's opposed by just over half of Democrats. While six in 10 Republicans want the bill expanded to allow the FBI to copy the outside of envelopes sent through U.S. mail, six in 10 Democrats and independents oppose the move.
Majorities regardless of party affiliation oppose letting the FBI demand records without prior judicial approval.
Percentages that Support ...
DemocratsRepublicansIndependents
Extending Patriot Act? 43% 80% 54%
Expanding record searches 17 42 32
Copying outside of U.S. Mail 36 60 37
http://abcnews.go.com/US/PollVault/story?id=833703#.UZjoi7XyKlc
EDIT: Here's the roll call vote in the House to reauthorize the Patriot Act in 2006:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll020.xml
214 of 227 Republicans (94😵 voted for the re-authorization.
124 of 190 Democrats (65😵 voted against the re-authorization.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI could care less what the numbers are in terms of votes. For example, the GOP gave Obama hell for going into Libya, and even passed a resolution for him to withdraw. However, when it came time to fund the troops, no problem, they voted to fund them and keep them there.
🙄🙄
Revisionist history from a right winger. The truth:
Extending the Patriot Act gets broad support from Republicans and a narrow majority of independents, but it's opposed by just over half of Democrats. While six in 10 Republicans want the bill expanded to allow the FBI to copy the outside of envelopes sent through U.S. mail, six in 10 horization.
124 of 190 Democrats (65😵 voted [b]against the re-authorization.[/b]
The GOP wanted the US out of Libya like the DNC wanted the US out of Iraq. In the end, they will have just enough votes either way to continue this progressive world domination.
Honestly, can't you distinguish partisan positioning and actual intent?
Originally posted by whodeyIt's insanity to claim that the American political system has become more "progressive" over the last 30 years. You repeating that craziness over and over and over again doesn't make it so.
I could care less what the numbers are in terms of votes. For example, the GOP gave Obama hell for going into Libya, and even passed a resolution for him to withdraw. However, when it came time to fund the troops, no problem, they voted to fund them and keep them there.
The GOP wanted the US out of Libya like the DNC wanted the US out of Iraq. In the en ...[text shortened]... ve world domination.
Honestly, can't you distinguish partisan positioning and actual intent?
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderThen you must show how it has become "regressive" as you progressives like to call it.
It's insanity to claim that the American political system has become more "progressive" over the last 30 years. You repeating that craziness over and over and over again doesn't make it so.
Government keeps increasing to provide its progressive utopia.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodey"Government increasing" is not a "progressive" idea in and of itself. Right wingers like yourself want the government to intrude in many things like a woman's decision over her bodily autonomy for example.
Then you must show how it has become "regressive" as you progressives like to call it.
Government keeps increasing to provide its progressive utopia.
It's a right wing idea that there are a certain segment of the population more deserving of societal benefits than the masses. The continuing growth in income inequality is completely inconsistent with any type of "progressive" ideas:
Contrast this with the United States, where from 1980 to 2005, more than four-fifths of the increase in Americans’ income went to the top 1 percent of earners. (see this great series in Slate by Timothy Noah on American inequality) Productivity among low and middle-income American workers increased, but their incomes did not. If current trends continue, the United States may soon be more unequal than Brazil.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/03/to-beat-back-poverty-pay-the-poor/
"Law and order" is another right wing buzzword. In the decades since the 70s, the number of people jailed or imprisoned has skyrocketed. This, again, is contrary to progressive ideas.
Taxes as a percentage of national income have decreased, not increased, in 30 years. The rich are now far more lightly taxed than they were before Reagan. "Progressive"? I think not.
I could go on and on and on but you are perfectly aware of all of this.
Originally posted by moon1969So are you describing the suppression of the truth during an election season about the attack by an administration who wanted to preserve its narrative of having won the war on terrorism "open" and "honest"?
The Dems should have fought the Patriot Act and the wars, at least Iraq -- but not by being unAmerican as is the right-wing currently but instead by being American through open, honest, and forceful debate.