January 5, 2013

Why is it "inhumane" and "idiotic" to question the veracity of the claims that have been made about Hillary Clinton's various medical conditions?

James Carville is saying:
I have no idea what it is about the secretary of state that drives them to this kind of inhumane idiotic behaving state.
Inhumane idiotic behaving state... is an odd way to struggle to make a point. People — like me — who notice the coincidence of this string of medical crises and the interest in avoiding questions about Benghazi are not "behaving." We're speaking. We're not in a "behaving state," whatever that's supposed to mean. We're looking at the information we have, analyzing it, and asking pertinent questions. This is political speech about powerful office holders in the United States of America. I am sick and tired of people who say that if you talk about Hillary's health you are inhumane and idiotic. I feel like yelling that. I want to stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to question and criticize any politician. I'm saying that out loud and sounding like this:



Clinton supporters are trying to shut down criticism by going hardcore on those of us who are just asking questions. We're being called inhumane on the theory that Hillary's problems are health problems. This accusation of inhumanity is — ironically, outrageously — being used to supervene any humane concerns directed at those who died in the Benghazi attack. I could just as well accuse Carville for going into a kind of inhumane idiotic behaving state whenever anyone suggests that anything other than Hillary's health deserves attention.

It's been said that those of us who ask — merely ask —whether there's some evasion going on here are asserting a conspiracy theory. First, asking is not asserting. Second, the idea that politicians are avoiding questions isn't a conspiracy theory. It's pretty much expecting the most ordinary and predictable sort of human behavior. Third, I can't think of anyone in American politics who is more famous for slapping the label "conspiracy" on something than Hillary Clinton:



And fourth, she was lying! When we're talking about Hillary Clinton, we're not talking about someone with a clean reputation for honesty. Talk about idiotic! It would be idiotic not to probe self-serving statements coming from the Clintons. The more histrionic these shut-up-she's-ill statements become the more suspicious I am. This is an immensely powerful politician who seeks even more power and has a motive to cover up what could be a terribly damaging story about an incident the American people deserve to know about. I'm sick and tired of people who say we can't talk about that, and I'm going to stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to question and criticize and debate about Hillary Clinton.

ADDED: Wow. Look at this NYT puff piece, crediting Hillary with "indomitable stamina and work ethic" because she went back to work after breaking her elbow. It's not like she continued working without getting it treated. She just went back to work with her arm in a sling while the healing took place. Doesn't everyone do that? (Unless their work requires you to do things with that arm.) I can't imagine if a co-worker came to work during the period of recovery for a broken bone that we'd be saying this is "vivid evidence of... indomitable stamina and work ethic." That's ludicrous!

Toward the end of the article, it says that Clinton still "plans to testify, while still in office" about Benghazi.
“She would have vastly preferred to testify that original date than go through the last 27 days,” said her senior adviser, Philippe Reines. “Only an imbecile would say otherwise,” he added, referring to charges by conservatives that Mrs. Clinton faked her illness to avoid the Congressional questioning.
Only an imbecile! Okay, if that's they way we are going to talk, I'll just say Reines is a.... oh, being a civil woman, I can't say it.

214 comments:

1 – 200 of 214   Newer›   Newest»
Michael K said...

It was probably Carville who left those subpenaed Rose Law Firm billing records on the table in the White House family quarters as the Clintons were preparing to leave office. Who else could it have been ?

dustbunny said...

Was it Christopher Hitchens who said the Clintons would rather lie than eat? They enjoy lying as it is more interesting than the mundanity of telling the truth.

From Inwood said...

Good for you.

EDH said...

There's a long history of this tactic, and its mockery.

MisterBuddwing said...

When CIA Director William Casey, about to testify before Congress on Iran-Contra, collapsed and ended up in the hospital with a brain tumor that ended up killing him, was I the least bit suspicious? No! Which is why I'm not the least suspicious about Secretary Clinton's health issues.

traditionalguy said...

The children are the ones called out for "misbehaving."

Obama and Hilary are the adults. So what if they keep the door locked so we children cannot know what adults do in secret...leading from behind secretly.

Ridicule of the childish GOP and their juvenile gun fetish is this month's meme over at the Obamaganda Ministry of Truth.

Everybody knows that the GOP are children who should be seen and not heard!

Darleen said...

...and who the hell is James "drag a 100 dollar bill through a trailer park" Carville to talk about people raising questions about a woman's character??

Michael said...

We are not going to get to know what happened in Benghazi. You can huff and puff all you want and get testimony from here to the end of time but you and I do not get to know what happened. Bad shit was foing down in Benghazi. Gun running. Torture. More.

Bob Boyd said...

"If you want to know who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." – Voltaire

From Inwood said...

This reminds me of an Irish wake (before feminism (-:, of course)where the eceased, a bum who'd left his family destitute & who had beaten them all in life, died of cancer & all the mourners were weeping & wailing about how he'd suffered during his last illness, the poor guy.

Shouting Thomas said...

All the hysterics from the Dems are only convincing me that what they are hiding is worse beyond anything anybody imagined.

What that could be is anybody's guess.

Remember when "Question Authority" was the Democratic motto? That was before the good people, i.e., Democrats, became the authorities.

Baron Zemo said...

I think that is right. We will never get the truth about Benghazi.

But if we can use it to destroy Hillary Clinton as a political force and permanently taint the Obama administration....well...you don't want to let a crises go to waste.

Shouting Thomas said...

The truth will eventually come out. Maybe not while Obama is still in office, but it will come out.

No, even that will not "destroy" Hillary.

Baron, you keep forgetting how heavily invested the media is in the Obama admin, and in the Democratic Party in general.

The reason the Obama admin is fighting so hard against Hillary testifying is obvious... it will force the media to cover an event in depth that it refused to cover in order to ensure Obama's re-election.

AprilApple said...

The left are always looking for manipulative new ways to stomp on your free speech.

Shouting Thomas said...

By the way, Ritmo came up with the most hilarious rationalization for this yet.

The Obama administration isn't really "authority," in the true sense of the word, because it isn't philosophically authoritarian.

Therefore, no need to question.

R. Chatt said...

Way to go, Ann!

A blast from the past: Bill Clinton 60 Minutes Interview 1992 ElectionWallDotOrg.flv -- Bill Clinton as presidential candidate discussing his alleged affair with Gennifer Flowers with an adoring Hillary sitting by his side. Her facial expression and surprisingly southern accent are outstanding as is his display of hair splitting semantics. Of course what makes it all so amazing is the subsequent Monica Lewinsky scandal we all had to endure.

AprilApple said...

Hillary's head trauma = She can't recall.

Much of the truth has already come out and it doesn't paint a competent picture of the Obama administration and Hillary's State Dept. The media are hiding most of what is already known.

sabeth.chu said...

we have outgrown voltaire.
we must not criticize anybody who has made it on the shortlist of politically correct species.

still, perhaps one should wait till clinton is healthy again. then she'll have to speak out.

From Inwood said...

Mister Buddwing @2:45

At Casey's funeral mass, the Bishop of the Rockville (L. I. NY) Diocese, who officiated, said nasty & obviously unnecessary & inappropriate mindless things about Casey.

Most Libs thought that necessary & appropriate.

I would’ve thought that Casey & we deserved a first-rate theological eulogy rather than a third-rate political rant at a funeral mass.

I told his widow so at a later time.

somefeller said...

The left are always looking for manipulative new ways to stomp on your free speech.

Yes, because pointing out that people are engaged in ridiculous speculation and conspiracy theories is stomping on their free speech. Such oppression!

Anyway, Reines and Carville are correct, and all the huffing, puffing, hand-waving and disingenuous references to free speech (and that really is all that the conspiracy theorists have) won't change that fact. The children who were screaming about birth certificates and skewed polls have now moved on to Benghazi. And they are getting all the respect they deserve.

Mitchell the Bat said...

In all fairness to James Carville, it's not easy to make the case that a high-ranking government official is above suspicion.

I'd have said no.

AprilApple said...

So in other words, Somefeller, you don't want to talk about Benghazi. You don't have any questions. You don't care about the answers. You have zero curiosity about the deaths of 4 Americans, one of whom was an ambassador. That's old news. To you it's all birth certificate all the time. Got it.

Shouting Thomas said...

somefeller,

You obviously cannot know whether your statements are true unless and until Hillary shows up, takes the oath and testifies truthfully.

Can you?

Shouting Thomas said...

Note, somefeller even calls us "children."

Children, obey your parents, the authority figures, the Democrats!

Hagar said...

As ye sow, so ye shall reap, and Hillary! has spent 40 years building her reputation.

somefeller said...

AprilApple, when people who have credibility start asking questions, I'll start wondering if there's anything more going on here than the standard bad shit that happens in shitty places. I don't expect much good to happen in places like Benghazi, so I'm not surprised when something bad happens there, and I'm content to let the people whose job it is to deal with such matters to handle them. By and large, the people jumping up and down about Benghazi are the Hillary-haters, Obama-haters or general conspiracy freaks that come out of the woodwork when a Democrat is in the White House. When serious people take this seriously, I'll start doing so.

rhhardin said...

"We've been concerned about your behavior" is standard control-speak.

"Sick and tired," on the other hand, is hendiadys.

Shouting Thomas said...

What's your evidence for that statement, somefeller?

Althouse is a Hillary hater? That's ridiculous? She voted for Obama first time around.

Do you have a substantive argument? So far, all you've done is appeal to authority. Twice.

That, in itself, is suspicious. Makes it seem to that you know the game is to cover up.

madAsHell said...

Didn't Paula "Pillowtalk" Broadwell spill the beans on Benghazi? Why has the press refused to correlate her comments with the deaths in Benghazi?

rhhardin said...

Will Hillary ever be asked to place her hand on her testicles and speak.

Obviously she can't if her arm is broken.

Shouting Thomas said...

Who are the authority figures who have "credibility," somefeller?

You are amplifying my suspicions with each of your statements.

SGT Ted said...

He talks like a totalitarian.

How dare you question Dear Leaders word? Only insane people would do that.

Maybe some time in the asylum to treat your illness is in order.

Ann Althouse said...

"We are not going to get to know what happened in Benghazi. You can huff and puff all you want and get testimony from here to the end of time but you and I do not get to know what happened. Bad shit was foing down in Benghazi. Gun running. Torture. More."

I'm still going to talk about how we aren't getting it. Even if I were 100% certain we are never going to get the truth, I'm committed to yelling about it.

SGT Ted said...

The Personality Cult excuse making the lefties engage in is fairly obvious.

AprilApple said...

somefeller - your side wants us to shut up.

People who have credibility? Like -- ABC news? CBS news? maybe NBC? Oh I know - MSNBC. They ask the really tough questions with their credibility. I don't see any so-called news outlets asking any questions. I see them fawning over Hillary and telling those of us who are asking questions to shut up.
Where is the credibility in that?

Tim said...

"Yes, because pointing out that people are engaged in ridiculous speculation and conspiracy theories is stomping on their free speech. Such oppression!"

The key for lie to be accepted as "truth" is for the implicated, the involved and the interested to distribute the lie, deny and denigrate the honest questioning of the lie, and then enlist the partisan and credulous, such as "somefeller," to play their part, happily and for free.

For this, the partisan and the credulous earn everyone's contempt.

somefeller said...

Actually, Shouting Thomas, I would say that Althouse is a Hillary-hater. That's not mutually exclusive with being an Obama voter (just ask some Hillary supporters) and anytime the Clintons come up, she goes into attack mode.

I chalk it up to some sort of Baby Boomer neurosis I can't understand, rather like how some Baby Boomer liberals who to this day go into a lather when Richard Nixon is mentioned, even though he was a fairly good President on a lot of liberal issues. It doesn't make someone a bad person, but it does make their judgment on a particular topic rather questionable.

Hagar said...

Personally, I think Hillary! is quite willing to talk about Benghazi, but wants an iron-clad guarantee that that is as far as the questions will go.
And I do not think she is going to get that, so I do not think she will ever testify.

Darleen said...

Oh my, somefeller, I'm glad you're so very content to let the same people whose [at best] negligence lead to the unnecessary deaths of 4 Americans to investigate same.

I wonder why that wasn't acceptable during Watergate, where no one died?

Sorun said...

"I don't expect much good to happen in places like Benghazi, so I'm not surprised when something bad happens there."

We only had an ambassador killed. Shit happens all of the time. No lessons to be learned there.

And what started it? Oh yeah, a YouTube video. Case closed.

Shouting Thomas said...

I can't speak for Althouse, but I think that the notion that she's a Hillary hater is absurd.

More likely, warts and all, Hillary is a feminist heroine to Althouse.

wyo sis said...

Why does it have to be " Hillary hater"?
Why is it hate to question her motives, and her history of lying and obfuscating?
It isn't hate. It's completely normal questioning of what's going on. Something about this, actually almost everything, about this Benghazi incident is suspicious.

Shouting Thomas said...

wyo sis,

I'd even state it a little differently.

What somefeller seems to be objecting to is that this investigation is being urged as a deliberately adversarial political strategy.

He's right. Trouble is, that is the safeguard built into the U.S. political system. These issues are supposed to be thrashed out in an adversarial political process. That's what is supposed to happen. somefeller's argument is null. He's arguing that Democrats should be exempt from this adversarial political process. He wants a friendly inquiry.

The press has failed in its duty to launch an adversarial political inquiry. Who's left?

Baron Zemo said...

Jeez somefeller you have got to be kidding.

Shouting Thomas said...

The desperation of the arguments for the Obama administration's stalling raises a lot of questions, doesn't it?

Chef Mojo said...

I'll start wondering if there's anything more going on here than the standard bad shit that happens in shitty places. I don't expect much good to happen in places like Iraq, so I'm not surprised when something bad happens there, and I'm content to let the people whose job it is to deal with such matters to handle them. By and large, the people jumping up and down about Iraq are the Powell-haters, Bush-haters or general conspiracy freaks that come out of the woodwork when a Republican is in the White House. When serious people take this seriously, I'll start doing so.

There. That's more like it. Turnabout is fair play, Libs. You taught us well.

Baron Zemo said...

Politics ain't beanbag.

Obama and Hillary have played hardball a long time and it is time we threw a few up and in.

Plus Hillary is looking more and more like Minnie Minoso. Just sayn'

yashu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
yashu said...

Hear, hear!

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

Bravo!

somefeller said...

I don't have a problem with an adversarial political process. But a judgment on the nature and credibility of the adversary is part of that process. And conservatives have conducted themselves in a childish and absurd manner over the past several years, to such a degree that anything that comes from that camp shouldn't be taken seriously. The people who gave the world birtherism, the Tea Party and unskewedpolls.com don't merit much respect. If other Democrats, foreign policy community types or more people on the right who haven't wallowed in the fever swamps come forward with questions (not very many of those, but they are out there), then the Obama administration should start responding to questions. But as long as the charge is led by talk radio hosts, anti-Clinton/anti-Obama bloggers and the Congressmen who server them, the questions don't merit much response.

On that note, here's a couple of questions for the questioners: why do you think Benghazi hasn't made much impact as an issue outside of right-wing circles? Other issues certainly did, like Obamacare, so why not this one? Perhaps you should consider those questions and the old story of the boy who cried wolf in that analysis. And you get an automatic F if the answer is media bias.

somefeller said...

Also - let's remember that the item that Carville and Reines were focused on wasn't what happened at Benghazi, but the claims that Hillary faked her illness to avoid talking about Benghazi. The fact that so many conservatives have decided to go into Grassy Knoll or mockery mode on Hillary's health is rather telling, and doesn't help their credibility.

Chef Mojo said...

So, according to somefeller, you have to be the right person asking the right questions in order to be taken seriously.

And he'll judge who the right people are, no matter how valid the question. It's all about who the gatekeepers are.

Funny. I keep thinking about John Edwards and the National Enquirer when I see drivel like that.

Chef Mojo said...

Because the National Enquirer never cries "Wolf!"

Baron Zemo said...

Hillary deserves all the mockery she can get. Who died and made her the fuckin' Queen. She is a politician who is famous for lying.
Snipers anyone? Her whole career is a mockery of a sham for crying out loud.

Did we suddenly go back in time to Victorian England or some shit like that there?

pm317 said...

Personally I feel Obama is responsible for what happened in Benghazi. So I find it ridiculous that you and the rest of them are going after Hillary. What is she going to say at the hearings? "Ask Obama?!" Ann, you are one coward not to ask serious questions of Obama but cast your hate toward the Clintons. Despite all his lying and thuggery and ugliness, you still show a soft corner for him. What makes you hate Hillary so much? Where is that coming from? On the one hand you reduce her to nothing, and on the other you make her a powerful politician that you have a right to go after, which is it? The day you start asking serious questions of Obama about Benghazi, I will support your quest for going after Hillary. Until then you are just a coward going after some nobody -- you know what? Obama and his cabal did make her a nobody when it came to Benghazi -- they did not keep the State in the loop. How difficult is that to understand?

cf said...

We have four more September elevens to live through on this President's calendar. The last one demonstrated that the Muslim world likes to party on that date, and they are glad to use it to show us how much Obama has failed in his overtures to them.

Not doing the hard work of honestly examining these events means the only "folks" who will be ready for next Sept. 11 will be the enemies of our freedoms.

That is truly idiotic and inhumane.

Robert Zaleski said...

"'If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen'." - Truman

I agree, if Dems don't like it, or someone in politics doesn't like it, then tough. Pack up shop, go home, and never do anything in Politics again. If you are in politics, then your life is public. You are a Public Servant. Deal with it.

And the media should shut up and do their jobs instead of criticizing those who do theirs.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

- let's remember that the item that Carville and Reines were focused on wasn't what happened at Benghazi, but the claims that Hillary faked her illness to avoid talking about Benghazi.

Seriously? You consider this statement a valid talking point? The claim isn't that she wants to avoid talking about Benganzi....but that she wants to avoid talking about what HAPPENED at Benghazi.

Whether her illness is real or merely convenient is also the point. If she is truly ill, I'm sure everyone here would wish her to get well.....so she can testify.

Althouse does not strike me as a Hillary hater either. Even I who can't stand Hillary and think she would have been worse than Obama, because she is sneakier, don't wish her ill. However, since the mode is to lie, obfuscate and lie some more....the onus is on HER to prove that she is ill or injured. It is up to US to question and question until we get the TRUTH.

Did you think she was going to be asked to talk about the weather, culture, historic scenery and nice walking tour paths in Benghazi? Of course they were going to hold her accountable, as she should be as Secretary of State.

If she can't stand the heat, then get out of the fucking kitchen.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

LOL @ Robert Z

I posted before I read yours. The Truman quote. Great minds think alike and all that stuff :-)

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I feel Obama is responsible for what happened in Benghazi. So I find it ridiculous that you and the rest of them are going after Hillary. What is she going to say at the hearings? "Ask Obama?!"

I think Obama's paw prints are all over this. However, YES. She should and could say just that. Ask Obama. He gave the orders.

However, as Secretary of State and the boss of those people who were murdered, we need to know WHO gave the order to disarm them, when they were begging for more security in the run up to the massacre.

Another quote: "The buck stops here".....meaning right at Hillary's desk.

Bob Boyd said...

"When serious people take this seriously, I'll start doing so."

"...those people who made the decision, and who knew about the decision and lied about it are murderers of my son.” _Charles Woods, serious person and father of murdered Navy Seal Tyrone Woods.

And dead men's cries do fill the empty air

yashu said...

somefeller's 3:56pm comment is a classic example of ad hominem argument.

Unfortunately, the meaning of "ad hominem" is too often reduced to "personal insult" (which somefeller has not engaged in here). But that's merely a subset, not the essence of argumentum ad hominem.

AprilApple said...

The democrats have zero responsibly for anything and in particular they have no reasonability for any negative consequences that are a result of their command and control. Don't question them. Worship. Blindly. You behaviorally challenged imbeciles.

That sums it up for me.

Chef Mojo said...

Also - let's remember that the item that Carville and Reines were focused on wasn't what happened at Benghazi, but the claims that Hillary faked her illness to avoid talking about Benghazi. The fact that so many conservatives have decided to go into Grassy Knoll or mockery mode on Hillary's health is rather telling, and doesn't help their credibility.

So, let me get this straight: We're just supposed to take the word of a proven liar that what she says about her health is in no way related to her testifying before Congress on a national security matter.

Gotcha.

Chef Mojo said...

In Hillary's case, that whole "cry wolf" thing really comes back to bite her on the ass.

chrisnavin.com said...

I just watched a video the other week Hitchens did on his book about the Clintons.

He was not a fan, suffice it to say.

pm317 said...

The buck stops with Obama. Period. But he is one lucky bastard to have had the Hillary buffer.. Just as he expected, the fools, imbeciles, and Hillary haters are going after Hillary and not him. Carry on! One more time, it was not a consulate, the Annex was a CIA facility, it was a WH approved CIA operation. Fools! Even the ARB report let that slip but don't let your stupidity get in the way of Hillary hating.

chrisnavin.com said...

I fully expect Hilary Clinton to testify as soon as its expedient to do so about the role State played in Benghazi.

Maybe the blood clot was bad timing. But she had better do her job and take responsibility for how well or how poorly she executed that job.

I'll even give our government the benefit of the doubt regarding what was going on at Benghazi and that there may be facts not prudent for me to know.

But that is based on trust, and mine is wearing thinner by the day.

fivewheels said...

A lot of people are backing off from the "Hillary hater" charge. But accusing her critics of being critics is not really a good defense, no matter how well some think that should just cow people and shut them up. Yes, I'll admit to being a Hillary hater, and this is exactly why. Because she's dishonest and untrustable. There's no reason to apologize for or backpedal from that.

chrisnavin.com said...

Even if Hilary thinks its a witch hunt, or politically motivated, all the folks at State should understand that not everyone shares the liberal internationalist worldview, and the realpolitik built atop it.

I trust you to do your jobs and do them well, but I have principled disagreements and real concerns about what this view misses. Benghazi? I don't really know.

I don't want a show trial, but I want to know the agencies acting on my behalf are adapting to the actual problems we have, even if I know full well that the goal of politicians is to achieve political goals, and well-meaning diplomats are answerable to political cycles.

It's also reasonable for Althouse to put pressure on Hilary to step up and just function within the process and its discontents.

Let's go, Hilary, just step up and put all the calculations aside.

Jay Vogt said...

Wall Street went batshit crazy when Steve Jobs was opaque about his health issues in his declining years.

Something about a fiduciary responsibility of management . . .

And there the issue was just a couple of hundred billion in market cap. No lifes or deaths were at stake or in consequence.

Although, there really is no telling what you'll catch when you troll a $100 bill through lower Manhattan.

Shouting Thomas said...

I try to put this more simply for somefeller.

The haters are supposed to be the ones asking the questions.

That's the way our adversarial political system works.

yashu said...

pm317, I more or less agree with this:

The buck stops with Obama. Period. But he is one lucky bastard to have had the Hillary buffer...

But not with this:

Just as he expected, the fools, imbeciles, and Hillary haters are going after Hillary and not him.

Insofar as Hillary is a "buffer," she is to a large extent a willing buffer-- it's her voluntary (albeit politically pressured) choice. IMO Hillary's delays/ evasions re Benghazi provide as much or more cover for Obama than her, deflect as much or more from his guilt/ responsibility than hers.

Which is not to say that Hillary is acting out of personal loyalty to Obama-- she's more likely to be acting out of personal political calculation (which is, like it or not, intertwined with Obama, cf. Bill's campaigning for Obama). But she's the one scheduled to testify, and she's the one delaying her testimony. You can believe the buck ultimately stops with Obama AND question/ criticize Hillary for her procrastinations (evasions or more neutrally, delays)-- evasions/ delays which benefit Hillary AND Obama.

Sam L. said...

They have always been liars, and accusing those who ask questions.

Pretty much proving our point.

Darleen said...

that's quite a bit of chutzpah from somefeller attempting to link "birtherism" with conservatives when it originated in the Hillary camp.

And I'd be more than willing to compare criminal records between TEA Party (none) and OWS (numerous)

See, somefeller isn't dealing with reality, only an Obama-media caricature of those that aren't Leftist apparatchiks

Hagar said...

We have been assured right along that Hillary's various indispositions only prevented her from going to Capitol Hill to testify about Benghazi, but in no way caused her to miss a day of work as Secretary of State as she was working a full schedule, first from her home, then from her hospital suite.
And we still have not seen or heard any public statement from a doctor who has actually treated her.

pm317 said...

@Yashu: But she's the one scheduled to testify, and she's the one delaying her testimony.

No that is not true. She said she would testify after getting the ARB report. And they got it in early Dec. She was slated to testify before the Christmas break (on the 21st I think) but she fell sick with stomach virus, and dehydration, concussion, clot behind her right ear, and now recovering from all of that. If you look at the pictures of her coming out of NY Presbyterian, you would be one hard hearted witch not to see that she was sick. Anyway, she has now said she would testify before she leaves. In fact I bet she knows she has to testify to clear her name because Obama (and Clinton haters) are all hanging Benghazi around her neck. In fact, the timing now is better than it was just before Christmas break. I just hope that she throws all caution to the winds and testifies about what was going on in Benghazi and hangs it around Obama's neck. If you read about that evening, she was not at the WH when Benghazi happened -- Panetta and Biden, the army fella and may be Petraeus were there but not Hillary. Why not? May be because State was not in on this operation? and may be she didn't want to be?

MadisonMan said...

James Carville is paid to say things like this. As a paid political shill, he can and should be identified, called out, and subsequently ignored.

Baron Zemo said...

somefeller must be paid to say things like this. As a paid political shill, he can and should be identified, called out, and subsequently ignored

Fixed for ya!

edutcher said...

Is it time to trot out the old chestnut that, if somebody wants all the talk to stop, it must mean the truth is even worse than we think?

That GRU story, f'rinstance.

somefeller said...

The left are always looking for manipulative new ways to stomp on your free speech.

Yes, because pointing out that people are engaged in ridiculous speculation and conspiracy theories is stomping on their free speech. Such oppression!


Then let's hear the truth from all sides so we know what happened.

AprilApple, when people who have credibility start asking questions, I'll start wondering if there's anything more going on here than the standard bad shit that happens in shitty places.

And, of course, some phony folksy is the arbiter of who is credible.

This is the guy who says anybody who says something he doesn't like is dumb.

PS Quit while you still have a head.

McTriumph said...

Bill and Hillary Clinton are clinical sociopaths, they can't help themselves.

pm317 said...

Here read up on what was going on: From the ARB report, see the highlighted part. The State did not know Steven's movement! What do you want Hillary to say? Could it be that Obama would not want her testify? After Petraeus's scandal there are more questions than answers but not in what you are hanging on Hillary's head, all that liar and other hate-filled nonsense.

The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice. Timing for his trip was driven in part by commitments in Tripoli, as well as a staffing gap between principal officers in Benghazi. Plans for the Ambassador’s trip provided for minimal close protection security support and were not shared thoroughly with the Embassy’s country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off compound. (p. 6)

yashu said...

In fact I bet she knows she has to testify to clear her name because Obama (and Clinton haters) are all hanging Benghazi around her neck. In fact, the timing now is better than it was just before Christmas break. I just hope that she throws all caution to the winds and testifies about what was going on in Benghazi and hangs it around Obama's neck.

I hope so too, but I'm much more doubtful that she will. Seems to me she's too bound up with Obama.

AllenS said...

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Obama didn't know what was going on. I think that he doesn't do jack shit in his daily activities of being president. He probably has people, or as he is apt to say, "folks" doing the daily functioning of administering government policy. I seriously doubt if he leads at all.

yashu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael said...

If we had a working press in this country they would find the survivors of Benghazi. There are many of them. Very silent are the survivors. Quiet like. Absent. Invisible. Are they bound to a vow of silence they each took to honor the memory of their fallen ambassador or is their silence being compelled for another reason? Or maybe they are all sick with one thing or the other and unavailable? I have been around a long time but havent seen anything quite like this evaporating story. Something horribly rotten was cooking in Benghazi, something very bad.

yashu said...

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Obama didn't know what was going on. I think that he doesn't do jack shit in his daily activities of being president.

I suspect this might be the case too (backed up by reports from the likes of Bob Woodward and others). But that would in no way absolve Obama of responsibility-- on the contrary.

McTriumph said...

It would be funny if the congress knows things Hillary doesn't realize they know. Hillary walks in to a perjury trap, Obama's administration does to her what Bill's did to Monica. Obama politically spunges allover Hillary's blue pants suit and then personally destroys her. It would prove there is a God.

Chef Mojo said...

@pm317:

The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice.

"(...) per standard practice."

So, State was aware of Stevens' unorthodox style of diplomacy, and by not taking action to change his methods thereby approved of them.

There's such a thing as "leadership." If State - and by extension, Hillary Clinton - did not provide that leadership, then something is seriously wrong. If the report is saying that Stevens effectively had an independent command, then someone at State is responsible for giving him that discretionary command. Like it or not, that would be Hillary Clinton. Ambassadors are not like Naval captains; they do not have absolute authority, and thus, absolute responsibility.

MikeAdamson said...

Inhumane seems a little far fetched but idiotic is obviously accurate IMO.

Penny said...

Why are we so blase' about not having an active, approved, not disabled, Secretary of State?

Testifying to Congress about Benghazi is very important, but hardly the most important responsibility of the office given all that is going on in the Middle East and around the world.

So who's doing the SCOPE of this important job as we exercise our American right to "fuss and fight" over Hillary's real or trumped up illness?

Paul said...

Serpenthead defending Hilliary's honor?

A man who has the honer of a pimp shields Hillary?

What a gas.

McTriumph said...

Hillary and Bill could be recorded on the Benghazi surveillance tapes shooting Stevens in the head. Of course they'd lie, the media would defend them, personally destroy Steven's reputation and the democrats would suck them off.

fivewheels said...

This is a good post by Althouse, with nothing much I can disagree with, but I think it might be skirting the elephant in the room.

The reason it's called "inhumane" is because HRC is a woman, and thus incapable of standing up to the kind of criticism that a man would. At least, this is the clear implication. And it's a longtime theme of her career. Bill gave her an important government role as the health-care czarina, but scolded critics and told them they should be ashamed for attacking his wife instead of him. Poor little Hillary in her senate campaign was intimidated by Lazio on stage. She's made a career of hiding behind her own skirts.

It might not occur to the professor because she's above that kind of hypocrisy, but it's another reason those of us who pay attention (and believe in legitimate, actual equality for women) are Hillary haters. She sets a horrible example.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

I don't know what Hitchens said about the Clintons, because Hitchens thought Reagan was a sub-human reptile.

Hitchens, unable to conceive as Reagan as a human, then wrote about it to the delight of many.

This delight, to me, seems to come from a deep, dark, feces-laden area of which I know little and wish to know even less.

Reagan was "a rictus of senile fury: I was looking at a cruel and stupid lizard."

The reasons are as stupid as a dumb leftist not getting a joke because of who told it. The reasons are leftism is a pathology that kills its host and others in the way.

And all you lefties get one thing straight: Reagan didn't need to steal anything to win the debate against Carter. Reagan won that debate because of decades of winning debates against libs using facts not fascist hate speach. That is what Reagan did: defeated libs and turned them into blood-thirsty sadists who refuse to acknowledge their President was human.

Read the slate article from June 2004 to see why conservatives are better people than murder-mongerers like Hitchens and the ilks closest to his.

yashu said...

The reason it's called "inhumane" is because HRC is a woman, and thus incapable of standing up to the kind of criticism that a man would.

This is a good point, but I think it's one of which Althouse is well aware. Cf. Althouse on Susan Rice and Obama's "damsel in distress" bullshit rhetoric.

fivewheels said...

No, you're right. She's definitely not blind to it, but I think she missed it here.

Anga2010 said...

Oh, my! I hope you don't really sound like one of the harpies when you say that.

Anga2010 said...

I hope, also, that you don't look like an acid-spitting velociraptor when you say that.

Anga2010 said...

Equating Hillary with a sub-human acid-spitting reptillian harpy... YAY me!

somefeller said...

Well, I went off to the gym for a couple of hours and I see no one has answered my questions. So much commentary, so little self-reflection and the benefits that come from such self-reflection. Such a pity. An opportunity lost.

Penny said...

And now, on a lighter note ...

There is nothing cuter than watching James Carville and Mary Matalin when they appear together on Sunday's "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos.

Now that they've been married with children almost as long as they've been in the spotlight and on opposite sides of the political spectrum, it's much more fun to watch their nuances in facial expressions than to listen to their predictable left/right commentary OR to watch the predictable Carville, naughty boy smile and Matalin, tough broad grimace.

No one, and I mean NO ONE, brings out the married couple in them more than Katrina, the robot, Van den Heuvel from "The Nation".

And if robot Van den Heuvel and robot Paul Krugman appear the same day with Carville and Matalin? There is no doubt in my mind but that they go home and have hot sex to prove they're still human.

Baron Zemo said...

We would like to answer somefeller but we are all not feeling well.

It's just not fair to demand answers when you are not feeling well.

Cough.

Lem said...

It would be idiotic not to probe self-serving statements coming from the Clintons.

I read that twice.

Lem said...

“Only an imbecile would say otherwise,”

That role is perfect for David Gregory.

wyo sis said...

Somefellers questions demand answers. Where is the person who should answer them? Oh, where could that person be? Damn it, he wants answers now!

betamax3000 said...

I tend to tune out the speaker when the Tea Party is thrown about as a signifier for right-wing extremism etc ("The people who gave the world birtherism, the Tea Party and unskewedpolls.com don't merit much respect," for one example). I don't pretend to be an expert on the Tea Party, but my general understanding of them is that they believe:

1) spending more than we have is irresponsible,

and

2) reducing the size of government is a method of restoring fiscal balance.

Our betters in Washington seem to have no problem with #1, so I will assume #2 is this extremism.

So to avoid this extremism it seems I have to believe that our current size of federal government is the absolute, rock-bottom, minimum size it could possibly be. Cutting 100 billion is cutting to the bone, no fat here. Having a government reduced to the size of the Clinton era: preposterous.

Which brings me to what I will call the Mr. Creosote Curve of Extremism.

For those not familiar with Mr. Creosote: in Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life" he is a morbidly obese man enjoying a rather large meal in a fine restaurant; at the end of the meal:

Maitre D: And finally, monsieur, a wafer-thin mint.
Mr Creosote: No.
Maitre D: Oh sir! It's only a tiny little thin one.
Mr Creosote: No. F**k off - I'm full...
Maitre D: Oh sir... it's only wafer thin.
Mr Creosote: Look - I couldn't eat another thing. I'm absolutely stuffed. Bugger off.
Maitre D: Oh sir, just... just one...
Mr Creosote: Oh all right. Just one.
Maitre D: Just the one, sir... voila... bon appetit...

...then Mr. Creosote explodes.

Now, the Mr. Creosote Curve. It spans the extremes from:

A: Mr. Creosote is the absolute, rock-bottom, minimum size he could possibly be. He cannot even be a wafer smaller.

Z: Mr. Creosote should be cruelly starved to a long, withering death. And have a leg or two chopped off. To the bone.

Now it would seem that the safe, moderate 'don't-offend-anyone/who-am-I-to-judge' position would be for Mr. Creosote to moderate his diet, and get some low-impact exercise - positions L or M or N, say. A doctor might be more proactive and prescribe him something in the 'T' or 'U' range.

However, to position 'A' those L-M-Ners are extremists like 'Z,', too. Hell, the 'C' and 'D' positions can't even be trusted, the wafer-hoarding bastards.

Which brings me back to the Tea Party: me, I would put them at about an 'R' on the Mr. Creosote curve; I will be kind to the Occupy Wall Street crowd and generously give them the benefit of a "D"*

(*Wow. Believe it or not, I did not initially plan for the OWS = D and Tea Party = R outcome, it just laid out that way on the fly -- only further convincing me of the Undeniable Truth of the Mr. Creosote Curve.)

However, nothing is perfect, ever. Please note that our federal government Mr. Creosote Curve DOES possess important distinctions from the movie's scenario:

1) We the taxpayers are paying for his meal;

2) The rich can only be taxed so many wafers;

3) In response to tax money the government will never, ever say "Look - I couldn't eat another thing. I'm absolutely stuffed. Bugger off. "

Michael K said...

" I'm content to let the people whose job it is to deal with such matters to handle them."

somefeller, do you ever get tired of that tit you are sucking ?

Shouting Thomas said...

somefeller, you're just fillibustering.

You haven't asked any questions.

You only asserted repeatedly that Republicans are partisan, which as I've said is precisely their job under our system, and told us that we must obey authority.

This it not a time for self-questioning. It's time for the Obama administration to answer for what happened in Benghazi. Your attempts to shift this back to the non-responsible party are silly.

Do you have anything serious to say? I doubt it. I can't even, really, make out what you're talking about. You're a partisan who wants to shield the party in power from public examination.

I'll repeat. The extent of your filibustering and diversionary tactics is proof that you are very worried about how serious the malfeasance on the part of the Obama administration was. That's the only explanation.

Baron Zemo said...

That's not fair to ask who somefeller thinks should answer the questions. Only somefeller can determine who is worthy of answering questions. Or asking questions. Or having questions. Or something.

The fact remains that you are not worthy.

Bow down peasants.

Shouting Thomas said...

As I said, somefeller, every time you post I become more worried about just how bad this will be once we find out what really happened.

You are apparently even more worried than I am.

The attempts of Democrats to shush the investigation suggests, also, that this is very very bad.

I Doubt It said...

Is Ann Althouse a transgendered man? I'm "only asking questions."

I Doubt It said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AprilApple said...

That's right. Camp Hillary! birthed the birther movement.

wyo sis said...

Ask away I Doubt It you might get an answer before Hillary can be persuaded to testify. I wonder if you are a friend of Harry Reid?

Chip Ahoy said...

This thread loaded with sinister comments has fired my normally somnolent imagination.

I've been thinking about creating templates for pop-up cards to bequeath to humanity and this discussion of 'how could you?' shaming gave me an idea for a get well soon sympathy card.

[but first, the very best get well card I ever saw depicted horrible drag queens piled onto a bed, or maybe just one, with boxes of chocolates, or maybe just one, and deplorable makeup and feather boas and such and on the inside it said, "isn't being a drag sick?"]

And it is!

The pop up is a red fire extinguisher ... to put out burning pants. And the second page is monkey kibble for her flying pets. I love those little bellboy suits. Third page a spring flips a bed right out of a hospital. Space is left on each page to personalize. The LIES the LIES, Good work boys, Get well soon! Come testify! (so we can dismiss that too) you know cheerful mood and upbeat fun throughout.

Did I ever show you the piss on you card? Sorry if I did already. Maybe I could improve something like this and make a template for it to bequeath to humanity. That would be great for suddenly thousands of them to appear on congress peoples' desks.

There's another version of ewe standing in a pond, for peace be a pond ewe.

And that idea was beaten further. This one caused confusion between a married couple. By its precise timing it was clearly for his birthday but she took it for a late coming Christmas card and so serves as example of how married couples horn in on each others' personal things. Back off, this was for my brother, not you, is what I was thinking, but what came out was, "mmmmm, eh."

harrogate said...

How very dramatic of a post. Oh, self-righteousness. And oh, the braving of all manner of oppression and scorn for the sake of truth.

There is no heroism like this heroism.

Shouting Thomas said...

That was jibberish, harrowgate... complete jibberish.

Expecting a government agency to account for its actions is not "self-righteous." This isn't about morality. It's about competence and whether law and duty were followed.

Do you have something coherent to say?

betamax3000 said...

On the Mr. Creosote Curve of Extremism I would guess the following:

Althouse: 'H', maybe 'I'.

Meade: 'O', maybe 'P'.

Your mileage may vary.

harrogate said...

Shouting Thomas,

I am referring to the bravery and outrage and righteousness and the desire to yell and scream and post videos that we see, because of the brutal oppression wrought by James Carville and other people on television and the internet.

How can it not be a righteous and glorious act to stand up in the face of all of this brutal speech-squelching and yell out for the truth?

wyo sis said...

Oh, the drama! I think I'll faint.

Shouting Thomas said...

Once, again, harrowgate, that is utter bullshit jibberish.

Apparently, you think you said something coherent, but you didn't.

The issue is whether a government agency performed its duty competently and according to law. We want the principals produced, and for some reasons that continues not to happen.

Are you able to comprehend that? Or, like somefeller, are you just trying to create another diversion?

I suspect the latter.

harrogate said...

Shouting Thomas,

You, too, are a warrior for truth, I see. Against steep odds and vicious critics you carry on. You know that in their hearts your opponents are *scared* of you and your questions! What, oh what could they be hiding???

It must feel great to be a hero.

Shouting Thomas said...

I can't make out what the fuck you're talking about, harrowgate.

I want the principals in the Benghazi incident to do their duty and appear before Congress.

You're engaged in a diversionary tactic that is pure bullshit.

I expect public officials to do their job. Now stop acting like a dumb asshole, and say something relevant or go away.

Your response makes it clear that you suspect that the Obama admin is covering up, and you want to deter and investigation.

Shouting Thomas said...

Who would have thought that Democrats would be repeatedly advising us to obey authority and to wait until authority decides whether they want to tell us the truth?

And, that demanding that authority be responsive to its duties is to be possessed of delusions of martyrdom?

What a fucking mess, harrowgate and somefeller.

All those great ideals of the left up in smoke!

Anga2010 said...

Venom-spitting sub-human reptiles. YAY!

yashu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
yashu said...

I don't always agree with Shouting Thomas (and we have different rhetorical styles), but I think he's been very much on point in this thread.

Paco Wové said...

"All those great ideals of the left up in smoke!"

You are mistaken, ST. The great ideal of the 'left' is to be in power.

You may have thought they were peddling something about "fairness" and "justice". but I assure you that you simply misunderstood.

David said...

The MSM and the lefties have no interest in remembering the trail of lies Hillary left when she was married to the guy who left his own trail of lies.

Or maybe they remember all too clearly.

Thus the bellowing outrage.

(Also, what Darleen said about $100 bills and trailer parks.)

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

Well, I went off to the gym for a couple of hours and I see no one has answered my questions. So much commentary, so little self-reflection and the benefits that come from such self-reflection. Such a pity. An opportunity lost.

All the Lefty obfuscation and sacrosactitude does is (I know...) keep bringing us back to the Emperor and his wardrobe IYKWIM.

Big Mike said...

Carville’s take: “I mean, this is really an inhumane kind of discussion that these people were having. I have no idea what would lead them to do something like that. It’s sort of beyond me — as if she wouldn’t testify on Benghazi; she said she took responsibility for it. She ordered an investigation into it and God knows what else. It doesn’t even make any sense. It’s just a cheap sound bite if you ask me."

That's actually a pretty mild outburst in defense of a Clinton considering that it's coming from The Talking Skull. Perhaps he's getting mellow?

Anga2010 said...

betamax3000
re: Mr. Creosote
Brilliant, sir. I salute you.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

I am sorry to have to do this, not in the sense "I am sorry and I would not do this again" sorry but a sorry like "this sucks to think about so I am sorry I am perhaps having you think for me on this yet I will" and the inherent "you are smarter than me and I know that so I can manipulate you into proving how dumb I am over and over and over again" unparadigm.

Sorry.

AllenS said...

somefeller said...
Well, I went off to the gym for a couple of hours and I see no one has answered my questions. So much commentary

I don't know about everyone else, but you've commented enough on this blog for me to not read most of your comments.

Lee Merrick said...

Thank you, Ann.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

Let's all start a comedy routine that shall not be ignored.

Checkers and chess.

Sure sure, if a smart chess player plays, by the rules of checkers a game of checkers the winner is all but assured.

But libs, and all humans, usually play differently.

Meaning, Chicago wins.

So, for example, if you are playing chess because you know the game, and your cold-blooded murdering empathyless enemy, Obama, plays street checkers, you lose.

And economics, per R. Dangerfield, is about knowing who to grease and greasing them right.

Not anything else. In America, or Cuba, or Canada.

Idiots spouting otherwise do it from a nontower of unIvory yet think their special knowledge matters.

Faith is why I believe in God.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

As an aside, I failed to correctly use the italicism html, and the software told me that so I could correct it post haste.

Very nice.

betamax3000 said...

The Mr. Creosote Curve of Lying:

A: the lie HAS to be this big; it cannot be any smaller, and if larger it would only explode.

Z: the truth is wafer-thin.

In this light Hillary's "I've fallen and can't get up (to testify)" seems like a 'C' to me, but give it a few more bites...

Maguro said...

I agree with somefeller. It is really distasteful to question the integrity of a woman who dodged countless sniper bullets in the service of her country.

LEAVE HILLARY ALONE!

Rabel said...

She's played the sympathy card before.

Obama didn't like it any more than Althouse.

Anga2010 said...

Well, I went off to the pub for a couple of hours and I see no one has answered my questions, although I recognize that I haven't asked any meaningful questions at all, so much so that commentary would be superfluous.
To that end, I am going back to the pub for a few more hours and I require answers to these questions before I get back:
1) What really happens when you die?
2) oh, um... that's the really important question after all.

master cylinder said...

Hey old white people!... just checking in to see what the outrage du jour is and I see it's still Bengazi. What exactly IS the gotcha? Are there more people that died? Is this part of a larger plot? Would someone lay it out? Say something more than "we want answers" please.

Mark said...

Ah, MC shows us just why we should take the Left's perspective seriously.

Michael said...

Master Cylinder: Benghazi is none of your business. Have you not heard? Butt the fuck out.

master cylinder said...

thought so.

Mark said...

Seriously MC, why should "we want answers" be irrelevant in the context of being under "the most transparent administration ever"?

So far, only Vietnamese and those in the immediate area of the collapse died because of Watergate. But they don't count. So the death toll for Benghazi is far higher than that scandal. Isn't that enough?

Oh, wait, you're too young to get that last paragraph, aren't you? (I'd bet my ass you're white enough, though. No one hates white folk so much as a young white snark-artist.)

FWIW, you may someday regret supporting a government that has decided lying to the little folk has no down side.

edutcher said...

master cylinder said...

Hey old white people!... just checking in to see what the outrage du jour is and I see it's still Bengazi. What exactly IS the gotcha? Are there more people that died? Is this part of a larger plot? Would someone lay it out? Say something more than "we want answers" please.

Old white people?

5 will get you 10, that's the cylinder and, as for people that died, the 4 that went down on 9/11 are still an issue, but we can always ask about the SEAL that supposedly was killed when the Hildabeast cracked her head for real.

Then, of course, there's the GRU story that Hilla was trying to make kissy face with the Dinner Jacket.

Remember Iran-Contra? That was blown by a plane crash, too.

When they send all the trolls out to disinform everybody, you just know there's more to this.

Sweat, guys, it's gonna come out.

wyo sis said...

I think we're supposed to get all intimidated and shamed when we're called old white people. 'Cause, you know, tea party and stuff.
Just sayin'.

Palladian said...

Hillary Clinton is an old white person.

Mark said...

So, for that matter, is James Carville.

Mark said...

And, FWIW, Monica's sperm donor is pretty long in the tooth too.

Mark said...

Last I looked, Pelosi and Reid don't have any excess of melanin, but do have a wealth of years behind them.

Mark said...

So MC, what was your point again? Pardon me, I'm old, but probably not as white as you.

Mark said...

And to the people who don't want answers about Benghazi, why the fuck not? We know pretty well what went down now, but we don't know who made the decisions and why.

Why do you want to be ignorant about such a disaster?

Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, right?

Peter Hoh said...

I'm pretty sure that it's already been established that "merely asking questions" is enough for some to label one as a conspiracy theorist.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Wow.

It was always evident that Althouse could choose to lose it at any moment, but watching her obsessive devolution into the right-wing equivalent of the falsely pregnant Palin conspiracist is pretty sad. What's more, it's medically obtuse and lacks any evidence.

The most ridiculous moment was when Althouse reveals her proud ignorance over the idea that any link should occur between medical events, as if each medical event should occur in isolation and not in relation to any other. Especially in someone over 65.

May this moment live long in internet history, along with the berating of Jessica Valenti for having breasts in Bill Clinton's presence and the idea that Obama made himself into a Greek god. I guess that for some people, idiocy is something worth really standing up for.

Mark said...

Yeah, when a Dem is in office asking questions is just crazytalk. When a Rep is in office dissent is the highest form of patriotism.

Go Occupy!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I'm pretty sure that it's already been established that "merely asking questions" is enough for some to label one as a conspiracy theorist.

Lolz.

Why is the sky blue? Are you sure that the sky is blue? What if the sky was really green but no one knew because color lens filters had been implanted in all our eyes? What if armies of small gnomes run a projection against an otherwise yellow sky to make it merely appear blue.

Conspiracy theorist, you say! I merely ask questions!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The great ideal of the 'left' is to be in power.

Lol. Which is exactly why the right won't have the integrity to redistrict the House so that their half million vote deficit couldn't lead to the false "majority" they have right now!

Ha ha ha.

Better to just watch them implode in ideological incoherence.

Mark said...

Ritmo, I fully expect Hillary to be dead before she testifies. In a way I feel sorry for her. I'm wondering how Bill is being bought off.

Your analogy reeks though.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Brave Ideological Warriors of the Right:

I address you now in all earnestness, as your zeal is much too strong to go wasted. While your furor is worked up, I ask, who said that Mars is really red? Does calling it "The Red Planet" just a way to displace our natural militancy here on Earth? Perhaps that is a (leftist?) conspiracy designed to spur us on to war across the solar system and in space, instead of right here on Earth, where wars are best fought.

And of course, planetary exploration is the realm of the least trustworthy of human endeavors - that of "science". We know that scientists tried to fool us into thinking that the link between carbon and heat contributed to the warming of the planet (even though that actually didn't occur). Why should we not believe that scientists used their powers of deception to make us think that Mars is really red?

And for that matter, why does no one question if the sun is really, truly, actually yellow?

I just scratch the surface, fellow conservatives. Your energy as astute keyboard jockeys and armchair observers of the universe is needed, lest sound reason overtake our politically protective veil of paranoia.

betamax3000 said...

Questions to liars are like sprinklings of Holy Water on a demon-possessed little girl: it burns, it burns...

Of the demon-possessed little girl the science authorities do not want to ask questions: they already have the answers, and will share with you what they feel you are allowed to know.

And all the while the little girl's demon is growing, now manifesting itself in head trauma. The lies that once spilled forward as if speaking in tongues have quieted. She is tied to a padded bed in secrecy; in pleas for truth, a turgid oozing of vomit.

When the exorcists compel the demon for the truth it evades, lies, obscures. The demon will eventually leave, and the little girl will claim to remember nothing, nothing at all.

First one to the bottom of the stairs wins...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Oh, goodie! Now we get the "You can't handle the truth!" speech from someone who thinks the scenes from The Exorcist were real.

Good times.

betamax3000 said...

Wait until I get to 'Smokey and the Bandit.'

O Ritmo Segundo said...

You see, the question that I really want to ask, is, why does poop smell?

I mean, if we pick it apart, dissect it with tweezers, and sniff it deeply, will that help us figure out why it smells?

What did Democrats do to make our poop smell?

It used to smell so good! It was Republican poop. Republipoop.

I just ask the important questions.

betamax3000 said...

Somewhere there is a photo of Bill Clinton trying out the Burt Reynolds' 70s mustache. Black Pontiac Firebird in a trailer park, working on the self-deprecating chuckle.

betamax3000 said...

Gennifer Flowers being a bit of Sally Field on the side.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

That's pretty old, Beta. But then, you call yourself "betamax".

Here's a more current creation to tickle your fancy and sense of political soft-core porn: Sexy Blue Collar Beer Brawler Joe Biden.

betamax3000 said...

In 'Smokey and the Bandit' Burt affectionately called Sally 'Frog'. I bet Bill Clinton tried that on a lady or two. Maybe even Hillary.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Joe Cool

betamax3000 said...

Close, but I think Joe Biden probably pictures himself as Clint Eastwood's "Joe Kidd", chewing on a cheroot. Rootin' tootin' and all that goes with rootin'. And tootin'.

Inga said...

Rootin tootin Republipoopin' .

O Ritmo Segundo said...

More fun stuff from The Onion

betamax3000 said...

I'm surprised Hollywood hasn't got around to remaking "Smokey and the Bandit." Matthew McConaughey is the new-ish Burt Reynolds. Burt posed nude in Cosmos, McConaughey plays bongos in the nude: symmetry.

Inga said...

But why did Burt Reynolds call Sally Field "frog"?

Could it be that she made croaking sounds at sensitive times? I demand to know the truth.

betamax3000 said...

The Pontiac Firebird would be a Hybrid.

betamax3000 said...

Re: "Could it be that she made croaking sounds at sensitive times?"

Like "that-time-of-the-month?" Those can be sensitive times, from my (limited) understanding.

Inga said...

Ah well, bedtime ya cute little sweet smelling Republipoopers.

I'll be chuckling over that until I fall asleep.

Bruce Hayden said...

I feel Obama is responsible for what happened in Benghazi. So I find it ridiculous that you and the rest of them are going after Hillary. What is she going to say at the hearings? "Ask Obama?!"

I somewhat agree, but think that they have to go through Hillary! to get to Obama. She is one person who is unlikely to fall on her sword to really protect President Obama. Yes, she claimed "responsibility", but that was really only token. If it comes down to Obama or her, and esp. if that means her future either political aspirations or legacy, I expect that she will easily turn on Obama.

Why Obama? First, I think that a lot of foreign policy and relations are being conducted out of the White House, instead of through Sec. Clinton. She clearly doesn't have the sort of relationship with her principal that her immediate predecessor did. And, I think that is why she is spending her time flying country to country, because that is something that she can do.

Secondly, someone most likely gave some sort of stand-down orders that night, and neither Hillary! at State nor Gen. Petreaus at the CIA were in a position to do so, but rather, it had to come down from the Commander in Chief. As someone pointed out elsewhere, a military response to this sort of thing is automatically "green lighted" by SOP, or at least SOP under Obama's predecessors (including Hillary!'s husband).

Third, it isn't clear how much Hillary! was in the immediate loop on the evening of 9/11/12, but it is fairly well established that the White House was, that members of Obama's immediate staff were watching drone feeds in realtime in the White House Situation Room. And, there are indications that Obama saw some of it, but then went upstairs to bed before it was over to get rested for his flight the next day to a fund raiser. So, the question really is how much Obama knew, and when, and if he didn't, why not, since his immediate staff did, and with that knowledge why nothing was done. Why there was no order to make something happen, like pretty much every President since the time of at least FDR, with one or two Democratic exceptions, would have done. And, maybe even an order not to do what would normally be standing orders to do in response.

betamax3000 said...

Avoid itchy blankets.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The party of the dirty diapers.

betamax3000 said...

A lot of poop and dirty diapers being flung around (figuratively, I hope).

Myself, I prefer sperm jokes: more life-affirming. Toss in lesbians and Craigslist and, well... I guess that we've already done that.

Sigh.

Bruce Hayden said...

Keep in mind that there are a lot of different aspects to the scandal, and Hillary! is only really probably implicated in the first.

First, a strategic decision was made to significantly downgrade security in Libya in general and Benghazi in particular, and this was implemented scant weeks before 9/11/12. While monetary reasons are given for this, they are far from credible, esp. with the increase of the federal budget of approximately 5% of GDP over the last 4-5 years. The more realistic reason is that it fit with the narrative, that Libya was a success of the Obama/Clinton response to the Arab Spring. The increases in violence in that country over the previous months was not consistent with that narrative, essential for reelection. This reduction in security and narrative of non-violence was vigorously contested by a number of people in the know, including the late Ambassador. They were ignored for political reasons.

Secondly, as I indicated in the last post, orders were either not given or standard orders were suspended on the evening of 9/11/12 for a military response. We need to know who said "no", and why the President did not say an emphatic "yes", in regards to the non-intervention of the American military that night. That decision had to have been made in the White House - no flag officer is likely to have taken that upon himself without knowing that he had their backing.

Third, of course, is the blatant lying over the next couple of weeks by the Administration about what happened that night. They were still lying about the video several weeks later, as well as the claim that the protest (along with mortars, RPGs, and sophisticated battle plan) were completely spontaneous.

Hillary! may have had some culpability with the first, but lacked command authority for the second, and cleverly avoided personally lying to the American people, having the UN Ambassador doing so instead.

Dante said...

The essential problem is the press isn't doing it's job. If the press did it's job of demanding answers, then let Hillary be sick. But the fact is they let these sick people, including Obama get away, like hit and run drivers.

LoafingOaf said...

Althouse is a political blog with some amount of influence. People should be asking questions of this blog, too. For example, in recent years this blog has become highly dependent upon links from hard-core propagandist InstaPundit. One can only speculate what would happen if she ever stopped serving, and started criticizing, the propaganda of extreme partisans like that, because it just doesn't happen here.

As a consequence, this blog's comments section has become a wingnut haven where anyone who disagrees with hard-right positions is labeled a troll.

I, personally, was disturbed by what happened in Benghazi and don't feel the citizens have gotten the answers we deserve. And I raised an eyebrow when Hillary claimed a concussion at a moment that seemed to be of convenience to her. It is right to be skeptical of the most powerful people in the world.

As events unfolded it became less and less reasonable to maintain that a conspiracy was at work, but Althouse apparently doesn't give a darn about that. This is a blogger who was very protective of the lies coming from the Bush administration that led us into an Iraq invasion, and the lies coming from Sarah Palin as she sought great power. She is very protective of right wing politicians. But notice how she doubles down on her theories about Democrats even after the facts turn against her. She even used to encourage her right-wing commenters to be birthers, though she made sure she preserved plausible deniability about that scummy BS.

She gets pats on the head from InstaPundit for this, and continues to drive her blog into the wingnut-o-sphere with less and less respect outside of those circles. Her blog, her choice, but she should stop whining about people reacting to her blog based on what it has become.

LoafingOaf said...

The essential problem is the press isn't doing it's job. If the press did it's job of demanding answers, then let Hillary be sick. But the fact is they let these sick people, including Obama get away, like hit and run drivers.

The whole country anticipated Mitt Romney taking Obama to task over Benghazi in the final debate but he declined. Doesn't mean others shouldn't be asking questions, but it did make it look like the Republican establishment was full of shit. Mitt Romney could have forced the media to ask more questions if he had come at Obama hard on that issue, and we were left wondering why he didn't.

Dante said...

Mitt Romney could have forced the media to ask more questions if he had come at Obama hard on that issue, and we were left wondering why he didn't.

I'm not sure why you blame it on Mitt Romney. The Candy played a role she never should have, which was to inject her opinion.

In any event, the basic point I'm making is that Benghazi is like sensory deprivation. When you don't have the answers, you start to invent them in your mind, and your mind will start to pursue ideas that make sense, but aren't based in fact. Because there aren't any facts to base it on.

Also, regarding your comments about Bush Lied, I don't want to get into a tit for tat. However, my read is this is why we went to war. Not because of Bush's dad, but because oil is the lifeblood that makes the economy run. It's incredibly deeply embedded in the economy, and migrating away from it is a huge task, especially since there isn't anything to move to.

There are now three players that have made plays for the ME, Saddam Hussein, who used Arab Nationalism to try to unify it, Osama Bin Laden, who tried to use Islamic fundamentalism to unify it, and now Achmidenijad, who seems caught up in trying to use anti-Western and Jew hatred to do it.

In my view, Bush simply used the tools he had available to try to bring stability to that part of the world. Get rid of the dictator, take the oil and push it back into the country instead of palaces, etc. Make a new democracy to make it work.

I'm not going to argue with the wisdom, but I suspect it has bought the world years of oil.

To me, it's a shame you simply can't say the truth, because people can't handle the truth. The world runs on oil, and we can't allow unpredictable dictators to have a monopoly on it.

Meanwhile, this country has done essentially nothing to develop our own oil reserves, and we have a lot. It's hard to get to, but the problem is you can't tell the truth in this country.

I do blame the press. The bill is coming, and it's not going to be pretty.

Stephen said...

It's commendable that you acknowledge your sophomoric and petty latching onto the deranged conspiracy theorists wet dream of Clinton faking ailments to avoid the Benghazi testimony, but really... this is a confession best made into your husband's neck late at night and not in a public post on your blog. Have a little self respect. We all forgive you your lesser moments.

whoresoftheinternet said...

Obama lied, people died, and Hilary hides.

Enjoy the decline, people!

Oh yeah...have you heard that Obama now is going to unilaterally take guns away, with or without Congress's approval?:

http://whiskeysplace.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/called-it-obama-to-seize-guns/

Newtown=Reichstag fire, everyone! But of course, Easy Annie A., the Abortion-Lover, will defend President Stepin Fetchit to the last.

AprilApple said...

Inga, you were wrong about the president. He did return to Hawaii. Care to comment? or are you just a stupid propagandist?

SGT Ted said...

This thread shows the totalitarian impulses of the Obama/Clinton Democrats and/or sycophants.

Hero worship, personality cult excusing, ad hominem and Alinskying the critics.

Plus, the Big Lie that Dmeocrats can do no wrong, even when they are carrying out the exact same policies they ripped Bush over for 8 years.

SGT Ted said...

The lefties are all tap-dancing around because:

Do you have anything serious to say? I doubt it. I can't even, really, make out what you're talking about. You're a partisan who wants to shield the party in power from public examination.

They are like a 14 year old caught with a bag of weed in his pocket trying to deny it's his weed.

harrogate said...

The important thing is how heroic and courageous Ann Althouse is. She will not be silenced. She channels the indefatigable spirit of the First Amendment, and righteousness courses through her digital veins.

That is the dominant theme of the post. Read it.

Inga said...

April, you silly thing, you said he was in Hawaii golfing, all the while he was in the Whitehouse negotiating. So damn what that he returned to Hawaii after a deal was made? Good for him, he deserves to have been able to finish his holiday break with his family.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The Candy played a role she never should have, which was to inject her opinion.

Opinion?

She read the transcript, you dodo!

Now we can't allow journalists to read things because the act of reading now constitutes an opinion.

Incredible.

kentuckyliz said...

The only way Hillary can get out of testifying ever is to die or be in a persistent vegetative state. Who wants to keep her quiet, and how ruthless/desperate are they?

chickelit said...

Inga said...
April, you silly thing, you said he was in Hawaii golfing, all the while he was in the Whitehouse negotiating. So damn what that he returned to Hawaii after a deal was made? Good for him, he deserves to have been able to finish his holiday break with his family.

Yes, but April makes you look ridiculous because you were so bent of shape that night when she first suggested he would return to Hawaii.

"Source, have you got a source for that?" was your fellatricious, Obama-defending response to April.

دردشة ومنتديات عراقنا said...

thank you
شات عراقنا
جات عراقنا
شلة عراقنا
عراقنا
شات العراق
دردشة عراقية
شات كيكه
دردشة عبدالله
جات
دردشة
منتدى دردشة عراقنا
منتدى عراقنا

دردشة العراق

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 214   Newer› Newest»