View Poll Results: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

Voters
94. You may not vote on this poll
  • Agree

    51 54.26%
  • Disagree

    43 45.74%
Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 224

Thread: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

  1. #31
    Educator
    mtm1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    05-25-17 @ 04:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,067

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    noonan does a good job of summing the situation up, it fact, hits the nail on the head.


    The Inconvenient Truth About Benghazi


    Why couldn't the administration tolerate the idea that Benghazi was a planned terrorist event? Because they didn't want this attack dominating the headline with an election coming. It would open the administration to criticism of its intervention in Libya. President Obama had supported overthrowing Muammar Gadhafi and put U.S. force behind the Libyan rebels. Now Libyans were killing our diplomats. Was our policy wrong? More importantly, the administration's efforts against al Qaeda would suddenly come under scrutiny and questioning. The president, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, had taken to suggesting al Qaeda was over. Al Qaeda was done. But if an al Qaeda offshoot in Libya was killing our diplomats, the age of terrorism was not over.

    The Inconvenient Truth About Benghazi - WSJ.com
    Go Vols

  2. #32
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,082

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    So you disagree with a military order, yawn. This must be the first time someone in the chain of command screwed up. Sound the trumpets.
    If any of you really cared about American lives you would be pushing for more money for Embassy security instead of this nonsense.
    Turning the death of an ambassador into this 3 ring circus for political gain is despicable.
    That's cute. Half the people you are talking to are involved in national security and have put their lives on the line for "American lives", but hey, you've got a partisan edge here and you aren't going to abandon it for a little thing like actual intellectual dedication to the truth.

    Everyone who liked this, you are only embarrassing yourselves.

  3. #33
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,358

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    If people died for politics I'm angry, if we did everything possible I'm angry only at the attackers.
    How is that even possible? What political advantage do their deaths give anyone? At least have something sensible to complain about like the fact that money for Embassy security was cut perhaps?

    Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.
    Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    How is that even possible? What political advantage do their deaths give anyone? At least have something sensible to complain about like the fact that money for Embassy security was cut perhaps?


    Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
    That was debunked By the Fact Checkers......

    ◾Biden exaggerated when he said House Republicans cut funding for embassy security by $300 million. The amount approved for fiscal year 2012 was $264 million less than requested, and covers construction and maintenance, not just security.

    Biden’s Libya Claims

    Biden claimed that Ryan “cut embassy security in his budget $300 million below what we asked for.” That’s an exaggeration. The fiscal year 2012 funding was $264 million less than the administration had requested, and the funding isn’t only for security. It covers construction and maintenance as well.


    Biden: Number one, the — this lecture on embassy security — the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one.

    The Obama administration requested $1.801 billion for embassy security, construction and maintenance for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, according to The Hill newspaper. And House Republicans came back with a proposal to cut spending to $1.425 billion. Ultimately, the Republican-controlled House agreed to increase funding to $1.537 billion after negotiations with the Senate.

    Biden also claimed that the administration wasn’t aware of security concerns among U.S. officials in Libya before the attack on the consulate in Benghazi that killed four Americans. The vice president said: “[W]e weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security again.”

    We can’t say whether requests for more security — which were denied — reached the top. But American officials who worked in Libya over the summer placed the blame on a deputy assistant secretary of state — not top administration officials — when testifying before Congress this week.

    Eric Nordstrom, the top regional security officer in Libya over the summer, said: “All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources.”

    Andrew Wood, a Utah National Guardsman who was leading a security team, testified: ”We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.”

    They placed the blame squarely on Charlene Lamb, deputy assistant secretary of state for international programs, according to Foreign Policy magazine.....snip~

    FactCheck.org : Veep Debate Violations

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,358

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    That was debunked By the Fact Checkers......

    ◾Biden exaggerated when he said House Republicans cut funding for embassy security by $300 million. The amount approved for fiscal year 2012 was $264 million less than requested, and covers construction and maintenance, not just security.

    Biden’s Libya Claims

    Biden claimed that Ryan “cut embassy security in his budget $300 million below what we asked for.” That’s an exaggeration. The fiscal year 2012 funding was $264 million less than the administration had requested, and the funding isn’t only for security. It covers construction and maintenance as well.


    Biden: Number one, the — this lecture on embassy security — the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one.

    The Obama administration requested $1.801 billion for embassy security, construction and maintenance for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, according to The Hill newspaper. And House Republicans came back with a proposal to cut spending to $1.425 billion. Ultimately, the Republican-controlled House agreed to increase funding to $1.537 billion after negotiations with the Senate.

    Biden also claimed that the administration wasn’t aware of security concerns among U.S. officials in Libya before the attack on the consulate in Benghazi that killed four Americans. The vice president said: “[W]e weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security again.”

    We can’t say whether requests for more security — which were denied — reached the top. But American officials who worked in Libya over the summer placed the blame on a deputy assistant secretary of state — not top administration officials — when testifying before Congress this week.

    Eric Nordstrom, the top regional security officer in Libya over the summer, said: “All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources.”

    Andrew Wood, a Utah National Guardsman who was leading a security team, testified: ”We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.”

    They placed the blame squarely on Charlene Lamb, deputy assistant secretary of state for international programs, according to Foreign Policy magazine.....snip~

    FactCheck.org : Veep Debate Violations
    Why did Chaffetz lie then?

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Why did Chaffetz lie then?
    He didn't evidently.....did he?

    One -- which was noted by several fact-checkers in the aftermath of the debate -- is that Ryan, as the chairman of the House Budget Committee, put forward such severe cuts in his budget proposal that, running the numbers, embassy security funding would suffer a cut of $300 million.

    The second was was to compare the relevant budget lines in the president’s proposed fiscal year 2012 budget to the amount passed by the House of Representatives last year.

    We’ll look at both of these justifications, but first, let’s outline what Obama proposed for fiscal year 2012 (figures are rounded):

    Worldwide Security Protection (ongoing operations): $1.45 billion
    Worldwide Security Protection (overseas contingency operations): $247 million
    Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance -- Worldwide Security Upgrades: $938 million

    Total: $2.64 billion

    Cuts from Ryan’s proposed budget

    The Obama administration’s Office of Management and Budget has run the numbers in the Ryan budget and argues that it will cut non-defense discretionary spending as a whole by 19 percent between 2013 and 2014. A 19 percent cut to a $2.64 billion line item works out to just over $500 million -- even more than the number Biden cited.

    Leaving aside whether this percentage is accurate, using it in this context is problematic. First, it’s not an immediate cut -- according to OMB, the 19 percent cut would happen in the second year of Ryan’s budget, with the first year representing a 5 percent cut.

    More importantly, as the Romney-Ryan campaign noted in an interview -- and as we have written in the past -- all of this is a speculative proposition. Ryan’s budget did not reduce federal expenditures across the board, and assuming that every item under Ryan’s budget would be cut equally isn’t the most accurate way to look at it. (That said, the lack of detail in Ryan’s plan has left the Romney-Ryan ticket open to such attacks.)

    Cuts in spending already passed by Congress

    Using the second justification -- comparing Obama’s request to what the GOP-controlled House voted to spend for fiscal year 2012 -- has the advantage of not being speculative. Here’s the amount passed by the House for fiscal 2012 (figures also rounded):

    Worldwide Security Protection (ongoing operations): $1.31 billion
    Worldwide Security Protection (overseas contigency operations): $247 million
    Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance -- Worldwide Security Upgrades: $755 million

    Total: $2.31 billion

    The difference between these two amounts is nearly $327 million -- a bit above the $300 million Biden cited.

    Ultimately, a final bill with slightly higher amounts than the House’s initial bill -- about $60 million more -- was passed by both chambers and signed by the president.

    But this approach has problems as well. For starters, Biden glosses over the fact that the president did ultimately sign the bill with the new lower funding amount, meaning he shares some responsibility for the lower level. (All presidential budget requests are opening offers that inevitably become subject to negotiation.)

    The main problem with Biden’s claim, however, is that it’s not really what he was referring to in his claim from the debate. Biden said Ryan "cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for," but what passed the House wasn’t Ryan’s budget blueprint -- it was an actual spending bill that emerged from the House Appropriations Committee.

    This may be a distinction of interest only to budget wonks, but by muddying the difference, Biden is able to hold up Ryan’s budget -- a long-standing target of Democratic attacks for its approach to Medicare and other federal programs -- as the perpetrator of the cuts, rather than the more obscure appropriations bill.....snip~

    PolitiFact | Joe Biden says Paul Ryan cut embassy security by $300 million

  7. #37
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    That was debunked By the Fact Checkers......

    ◾Biden exaggerated when he said House Republicans cut funding for embassy security by $300 million. The amount approved for fiscal year 2012 was $264 million less than requested, and covers construction and maintenance, not just security.
    So gates and walls don't get upgraded/built and old ones are in disrepair. Yeah, that makes sense.


    You can't cut their budget by 15% then bitch because it wasn't good enough.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    So gates and walls don't get upgraded/built and old ones are in disrepair. Yeah, that makes sense.


    You can't cut their budget by 15% then bitch because it wasn't good enough.
    They didn't......

    Ultimately, a final bill with slightly higher amounts than the House’s initial bill -- about $60 million more -- was passed by both chambers and signed by the president.....snip~

  9. #39
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,766

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    They didn't......

    Ultimately, a final bill with slightly higher amounts than the House’s initial bill -- about $60 million more -- was passed by both chambers and signed by the president.....snip~
    But not when it was desperately needed at first.
    As we rightly do for RED states.
    Most cons aren't ignorant enough to argue this one. Please continue until 2014.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: GOP Benghazi hearings a partisan disgrace?

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    But not when it was desperately needed at first.
    As we rightly do for RED states.
    Most cons aren't ignorant enough to argue this one. Please continue until 2014.
    Try again.....that's from Politi Fact and Fact Check. org. Moreover you missed Hicks, Thompsons and Nordstrom's Testimony? Which one do you think is the Democrat and voted for Hillary?

Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •