Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Monday, May 5, 2014


Ermergerd!  Remember how the House Republicans demanded a select committee be formed to look into all the false statements the Republican Bush administration made in the run-up to the Iraq debacle?

No, neither do I.


It's always a horse of a different color when the shoe is on the other foot.  Or something.  Especially when it involves polyticks:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.

"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism. 

 According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years. 

 The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations.

Darrell "Benghazi" Issa

"We’re going to establish a very different policy. One, that we have a president who will respect the Constitution, not try to convert it to some South African Constitution."  --Darrell Issa (Jerk-CA, 49th District)

Oh FFS! Darrell, Obummer is KENYAN, not South African! Get your stupid right!  



Rational Nation USA said...

Interesting, 935 falsehoods for the Bush administration regarding Iraq and their ill conceived war.

Benghazi. Perhaps in 11 years and after a study by a non profit journalism group the nation will know the complete and honest story.

But for now? It continues to be a distraction.

Anonymous said...

Obama didn't give Bush a pardon like Ford gave Nixon a pardon, but one of Obama's first orders as President was to declare their would be no investigations of the Bush administration.

Shaw Kenawe said...

It's polyticks!

Definition of polyticks: many blood-sucking arachnids.

Rational Nation USA said...

It was generally accepted Ford made the right decision. So... what's the lesson to be learned from Ford's decision? Obviously it has been lost on house repubs.

Time to heal and move on.

George Cumerbund said...

The blood-lusting extremists won't let go of BENGHAZI! because Obamacare is working and succeeding, what else do they have? Oh, KENYAN MARXIST AMERICA HATER! IOW, they got nuthin'.

Veritas said...

Claim: Various critical statements about the September 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya:

FALSE: Administration officials watched the attacks unfold in real time but did nothing to intervene.

FALSE: Requests issued by U.S. personnel for military back-up during the attacks were denied.

FALSE: General Carter Ham was relieved of his command for attempting to provide military assistance during the Benghazi attacks.

FALSE: Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette was relieved of his command for attempting to provide military assistance during the Benghazi attacks.


Ema Nymton said...



Shemghazi, Shemghazi, Shemghazi.

It is a joy to watch the Murdoch Media/Fox Networks/GOP slugs squirm. They really are finished as a credible source of information/data/opposition/anything. Good bye to trash.

Given the situation with the Republican'T Party, the persons who wins the Democratic Party nomination for President/Vice President will win.

Ema Nymton
~ @ : o ?

Veritas said...

NOTE: a number of the howling BENGHAZISTAS do not accept fact checking by Snopes,, or Politifact. Their usual source for facts is from the tin foil they wear on their heads and FAUX Almost News.

Rational Nation USA said...

Given the republican party does not seem to understand that to win it needs independents and moderates I agree Ema. Appealing to the most conservatve wing and not offering viable ideas with broad appeal will result in another democrat sitting in the Oval office. No matter how bad the democratic candidate may be.

skudrunner said...

I don't remember the other side letting Watergate or Plame go away without a special investigation.

Granted this is political but the administration should have let everything out at the beginning and this would be over and not used as cannon fodder in November.

Did the administration lie, of course and so did Bush. Biggest difference is the media let the current administration not have to provide any answers.

What difference does it make, this is just a right wing conspiracy.

George, obamacare is working for the 95% who received subsidies, for those who have had their rates increased to pay for them, not so much.

Jerry Critter said...

The republican's best chance to win the presidency in 2016 is to run a Democrat.

Shaw Kenawe said...

skud: "Biggest difference is the media let the current administration not have to provide any answers."

Right. BEcause the MSM didn't carry any of the Issa hearings or any of the stories of released emails. And at pressers, the MSM didn't ask any questions about this. What you're p.o'd about is that Obummer wasn't impeached over this non-scandal.

skud: "What difference does it make, this is just a right wing conspiracy."

Finally, some reality on your part.

skud: "George, obamacare is working for the 95% who received subsidies, for those who have had their rates increased to pay for them, not so much."

Written without a drop of evidence to back that up.

As Ducky would say, "Pitch 'til you win."

Dave Miller said...

I think the issue is two-fold.

One is the ferfuffle over the way the Admin characterized the events in Benghazi. From what i have seen, Issa and his leaders have focused more on the post tragedy events. As Skud acknowledged, they are looking at the political ramifications.

As for the actual attack that took the ambassadors life, and three others, that is another story. We are not hearing much on that, or why security was lax, etc.

But when we have an administration that has pledged to be the most transparent in history, stonewalling the release of documents, and claiming this new email, which may show nothing at all, is not about Benghazi and the events of that night, it is ludicrous.

The Obama admin, while claiming openness, is anything but. Is it any wonder people on the opposing side do not trust them?

I have no idea what actually happened that night. I don't know if someone in the admin turned down additional security in the days and months before that fateful night, because Issa has not gone after that info.

What i do know is that the Admin politically massaged the details of that night, as any admin would do. And they clumsily tried to deny it.

Is the GOP blameless in this? Of course not, but this Admin has got to be one of the most inept I've seen at managing the political optics of what theya re trying to do.

They are hopeless... sorry to say.

Shaw Kenawe said...

If the CIA was involved, as this report indicates, we may never know, until years from now, what was really happening. It appears the CIA is still a rogue entity within our government.

Here's part of the report in Business Insider from last year:

"In May CNN's Jake Tapper argued that the CIA's presence in Benghazi, where four Americans were killed in an attack on September 11, 2012, should be scrutinized.
Congressman Frank Wolf (R-Va.) agreed, saying: "There are questions that must be asked of the CIA and this must be done in a public way."

The Agency, for its part, doesn't want anyone knowing what it was doing in the Libyan port city.

On Thursday Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston of CNN reported that the CIA "is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret."

Sources told CNN that 35 Americans were in Benghazi that night — 21 of whom were working out of the annex — and that several were wounded, some seriously.

One source said: "You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation."

Among the questions are whether CIA missteps contributed to the security failure in Benghazi and, more importantly, whether the Agency's Benghazi operation had anything to do with reported heavy weapons shipments from the local port to Syrian rebels.

In short, the CIA operation is the most intriguing thing about Benghazi."

Shaw Kenawe said...

BTW, Dave, the lukers from AOW's and Geeeez's blog (who come here every day) will ignore your criticism of the Obama administration and at some point claim you're a "partisan" because sometimes you agree with the Obama administration.

NOTICE TO AOW's and Geeez's lurkers:

GEt your stories right! Oh...wait, you do! They're always slanted right!

PS. Thank you for being such faithful readers of this blog.

Analmouse said...

Why are WE THE PEOPLE putting up with this subversion?

Darrell Ickshun said...

The Republican conference is so fractured, there’s really only two things they agree on: they don’t like Obamacare… and they do like talking about Benghazi,

Dave Miller said...

Shaw... i love when people set up accounts under my name and comment, or cut and paste part of my comments from here... priceless.

I also love how people who claim to love and honor God, anonymously post horrible comments on my ministry blog...

I've got to check every other day or so to take out the trash.

Very God honoring and great evidence of the good character that conservatives claim to stand for.

Duckys here said...

Oh FFS! Darrell, Obummer is KENYAN, not South African! Get your stupid right!

Speaking of South African, I wonder if Lara Logan will be testifying to the committee?

skudrunner said...


I thought you followed the news

You were kidding bout the MSM treatment of BHO, correct. How many press conferences has he had where their are questions? Throw him a soft ball and he will hit it.

The CIA has already given their side and it differs from the administration. No one believes obama wrote those talking points, he probably didn't even know what they said until after the were said. He was far to busy going to a fund raiser to worry about talking points after all he has an agenda.

okjimm said...

Ben Ghazi's is a nice little cafe....good coffee and donuts. is so telling, that after all this time, this is all they have, a tragedy not of the administration's creation. After all this political dirty tricks,no sex scandal, no bank, savings and loan foreign invasions....'s Karl Rove blowing smoke.....and, trust me, I have had enough smoke...literal and figurative. Screw Issa...I have a real fire for him...he has nothing and the longer he moans about it, the larger his real fire will be. He will burn himself. must be happy hour somewhere...I best go look for it.

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

GOP blows secrets and risks lives in document dump ahead of debate

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) compromised the identities of several Libyans working with the U.S. government and placed their lives in danger when he released reams of State Department communications Friday.”

This time Darrel Issa has gone too far:

Issa didn't bother to redact the names of Libyan civilians and local leaders mentioned in the cables, and just as with the WikiLeaks dump of State Department cables last year, the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate

Now if any of you are wondering why I am in lather over this Benghazi investigation, it is because Darrel Issa and the entire Republican establishment has a history of putting party before country with unfettered recklessness – demonstrating a willingness to shoot at anything just to build a straw man case against Obama, or Hilary Clinton, or John Kerry – or any scapegoat de jour they can find.

This is standard GOP operating procedure: Consider the case of Valerie Plame, the CIA operative whose cover was blown just because her husband exposed one of the deceptions employed by the Bush/Cheney Administration to justify a bogus war. In 2006, Speaker Pelosi was wrong in taking impeachment off the table; Cheney should have been impeached.

If anyone should be investigated over Benghazi, it should be Darrel Issa for abusing his authority as House Oversight Committee Chairman and putting American intelligence assets at risk. Frankly, charges against Issa would be a bonus. And serve as a warning to all GOP demagogues and panders.

BB-Idaho said...

From the NY Times, Oct 2012-
"At a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last Wednesday, Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California and the committee’s chairman, talked of “examining security failures that led to the Benghazi tragedy.” He said lawmakers had an obligation to protect federal workers overseas. On Sunday, he said more should be spent on diplomatic security.

But as part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department’s two main security accounts. One covers things like security staffing, including local guards, armored vehicles and security technology; the other, embassy construction and upgrades. In 2011 and 2012, President Obama sought a total of $5 billion, and the House approved $4.5 billion. In 2009, Mr. Issa voted for an amendment that would have cut nearly 300 diplomatic security positions. And the draconian budgets proposed by Mitt Romney’s running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, would cut foreign affairs spending by 10 percent in 2013 and even more in 2016."
Congressman Issa voted to cut
the security budget, then blames
the admin for faulty security.
Everyone, even Geeez-o-phants, should know that.

BB-Idaho said...

The politics are blatant and translucent .

skudrunner said...

A little additional reading to support my statement.

Of the 5.45 million people who signed up through the federal exchange, 5.18 million (or 95%) applied for financial assistance in their insurance plans. Only about 695,000 people (13%) indicated they did have coverage.

Read more:

Dervish Sanders said...

Ford made the wrong decision. No prosecutions for any of the bush war criminals was a wrong decision of the Obama administration. But there is no "lesson to be learned from Ford's decision" by the House rEpublicans because Benghazi is a fake scandal, whereas the crimes of the bush administration are REAL.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Dave, the folks on those blogs who blabber about how the lefties don't like to hear anything that isn't Demspeak, treat you exactly the way they accuse the Democrats of treating people who disagree with them.

BTW, those people on those blogs aren't conservative/Republicans, they're TeaPublicans who are consumed with ObamaHate. You can't really take them seriously. They're rather adorable in their demented hatred. The Republicans in my family and who are friends are NOTHING like those people. The GOPers I know are not delusional. They actually make some sense. Those people? Not so much.

I wouldn't get upset with people who cheat and lie and pretend to be you. It would be like being upset with 2-year olds. They need to be told to drink their milk and take a nap.

Shaw Kenawe said...

BB-Idaho, the more the country accepts Obamacare, the more the TeaPublicans will bellow about BENGHAZI.

They're the only ones obsessed with it. The rest of the country knows there was no conspiracy or scandal, and that's what pisses them off.

Shaw Kenawe said...

More answers to commenters later. On a very busy schedule just now.

Thanks to all of you for your input!

Annie Of Watertown said...

I am so personally nauseated by this.