May 15, 2013

Krauthammer on Benghazi.

Today:

62 comments:

John Lynch said...

People died, Obama lied?

Original Mike said...

Screw the talking points issue. I want to know why my government abandoned its personnel.

Richard Dolan said...

Just be quiet and present the facts, he says.

Nice idea, but Congressional committees are not engaged in journalism (neither are journalists, but that's a different problem). It's never going to happen with politicos doing the presenting.

edutcher said...

We let the facts speak for themselves last year.

They stole the election.

Ulysses S Grant wasn't that good a general, but he understood once you have a hold of the enemy, you don't let go. You keep pounding him.

As Yul Brynner put it, "You have to be prepared for killing and more killing and more killing after that, until the reason for the killing is gone".

Being a nice guy won't work. Think Bush 41 and Bush 43. They thought the facts would speak for themselves.

Lem said...

Be quiet and let the facts speak?

How do the facts speak for themselves?

I'm puzzled ... he wants us muzzled?... who cares who ruffles.

Uncharacteristic Khammer.

wyo sis said...

When has the left EVER let the facts speak for themselves?
Facts are manipulated. We have virtually no facts.

If this means we play by their playbook, fine. There is nothing wrong with making conclusions based on what we know.

What we know indicates this is very bad for the administration and getting worse. If we back off at all we really deserve the kind of government we get. This kind of government only recognizes defeat when there is no possible way to get up off the floor.

traditionalguy said...

There is a lawyer on deck.

Meade said...

I think he means: speak about the facts and evidence as they emerge. Avoid the distraction of spinning political gold. Especially political gold out of Hillary Clinton's dirty oily blonde hair. Oops, there I did it again.

Lem said...

If nobody speaks out the narrative will be that this was justified.

Until the party in power is out of power and the power of the IRS is used discriminately over them instead of the mean tea parties.

Khammer must be speaking of a narrow group... maybe he is afraid an undisciplined congressman from middle America wills say something embarrassing, like about Obama's skin color or whatever, and create a distraction viral video that takes away the focus on the administrations malfeasance.

That must be it... don't turn the ball over... play it safe... the clock is your friend.

I say F that.

MadisonMan said...

Can't argue with him. But no matter what Republicans say, Democrats will reply that it's all political. Because what else can they say?

I will add -- does he always sit like that? He looked very uncomfortable, and unflexible. I mean, like his back was broken or he's super-constipated. I don't often watch TV News shows (like never), that's why I'm asking.

SteveR said...

Well I think he is giving the "rational" approach, rather than the Hannity one. Doesn't do any good to all pile on and create an impression that turns off the low information voters who mostly are ignorant. There is time but there still needs to be some pushing. Most people who have been paying attention know there have been lies and facts buried. Liars

exiledonmainst said...

Madison Man: Krauthammer is a parapelgic. He was in an accident as a young man and has been in a wheelchair ever since.

Lem said...

Especially political gold out of Hillary Clinton's dirty oily blonde hair. Oops, there I did it again.

If Meade is going off script... I'm going off script!

"I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'"

Meade said...

@MadMan: "During Krauthammer's first year of medical school, he was paralyzed in a diving accident[3][4] and was hospitalized for 14 months. "

Coketown said...

Wheels has a point. Three in fact. Benghazi is unquestionably a Huge Story--so huge that Firefox has added Benghazi to its spell-check dictionary, which was not the case when the story broke.

As much explaining as the president has to do, it is dwarfed by the explaining the press should have to do for why they completely ignored such a tremendous story.

Gahrie said...

I will add -- does he always sit like that? He looked very uncomfortable, and unflexible. I mean, like his back was broken

He's sitting in a wheelchair and is on a respirator. he had a diving accident in college.

Meade said...

@Lem: as if either of us have been or ever could be on script. :-)

Coketown said...

Oh come on! Meade couldn't drop that little expose AFTER my comment? Now I just look insensitive.

Ah, well. Spring lilies bend at the faintest breeze.

Martha said...

I believe Krauthammer's diving accident left him a quadriplegic. Despite that, Dr. KRAUTHAMMER completed medical school and a psychiatry residency before becoming a Washington Post columnist. He is a remarkable man.

Meade said...

Coketown said...
"As much explaining as the president has to do, it is dwarfed by the explaining the press should have to do for why they completely ignored such a tremendous story."
Precisely. Never stop questioning, never trust the government is the best way to honor those 4 brave Americans.

bagoh20 said...

Is truth the highest value in our society? I think Krauthammer assumes it is, but it most certainly is not. The question is: How can we be smart and scientific and truthful about this truth about truth?

garage mahal said...

Why aren't we discussing the BIG Benghazi emails released today?

Oh, I know why. This is a stupid ginned up pseudo scandal and there was nothing in them.

Lem said...

Why aren't we discussing the BIG Benghazi emails released today?

Obama doesn't get credit for doing what he is supposed to do.

This isn't kindergarten.

bagoh20 said...

The emails (100 selected out of over 2500) prove that a number of administration people have been lying, but they released just enough to take some of the heat off the scandal that has the Press pissed, and the other one that has the taxpaying voters pissed. I don't think it was successful, but they appreciate your hard work.

Lem said...

The question is: How can we be smart and scientific and truthful about this truth about truth?

I was going to say that was a homerun, but then I thought better of it... don't want to go off script.

Lem said...

The emails (100 selected out of over 2500)

You mean they didn't release everything?

Biff said...

I'm totally onboard with what Original Mike said: "Screw the talking points issue. I want to know why my government abandoned its personnel."

Seriously. The explanations about military assets not being ready to respond quickly enough to make a difference don't make sense. On the other hand, if the explanations really are true, isn't that actually a worse scandal, i.e. a strategic scandal, as opposed to making tactically poor decisions in a crisis situation?

I also recall looking at the Bengahzi consulate's website as soon as I heard the facility was under attack. It had astonishingly saccharine blurbs about being "Now open for business!" for processing Visa applications. The tone would have been embarrassing if the consulate were located in a stable, friendly resort town; the idea that it was being used in a place so recently engaged in civil insurrection beggared belief. A small thing, perhaps, but emblematic of a naive culture in certain quarters of the State Department.

Unfortunately, all I can think of is Bob Dole asking, "Where is the outrage?"

John Lynch said...

I don't need emails.

1. There was an obvious terrorist attack on the consulate, involving dozens of armed men and the deaths of Americans.

2. The administration wanted to conflate the attack with a mob outside the embassy in Cairo.

The administration trotted out a lot of big names to talk about a stupid, badly named video instead of the terrorist attack.

It was obvious within a week that the administration was lying, and they kept doing it. It was an election year. Clearly, it worked for them in the short term. The election wasn't close but if it had been it might have mattered.

That's normal dishonest partisan politics. Obama and Co. lied through their teeth to Congress and the public. Susan Rice paid for that.

Now, on the question of whether they could have done more about the attack while it was happening, I think that's a good question. My personal view is that the President was less than decisive. I don't think this is a crime but it is certainly a failure. Did he have time to make a decision? Maybe, maybe not.

The fact that no subordinate was willing or able to do that is also interesting. Couldn't some military commander have responded on their own initiative? Why didn't they? The lack of leadership troubles me.

From Inwood said...

MY note to a group thread I'm on:

[X] I think that one can sum up all the troubles by saying that the Obama Administration has combined Carter-level incompetence with Nixon-level untrustworthiness. Or “You can fool all the people some of the time & some of the people all of the time & while two outta three ain’t bad, sometimes it’s problematic.”

[Y], your Megan Mc note may be right when she says that it’s the old trick of Accounting Obfuscation 101 to get all your troubles out at once. I personally feel that the IRS story is a head fake for Benghazi because most people are cynical about how power corrupts & know that FDR & Nixon for example used the IRS & various POTUSES used J Edgar Hoover. So, they’ll not dump Obama& the Dems solely because of that. As someone has said: The man was elected twice. Never underestimate the gullibility of the American people.

[Z], you’ve hit upon something with “hubris”, but IRRC, the term is generally used to describe a character flaw in someone who had done something great, good or bad, a man of substance, a man in full, if you will up to the time of the hubris; someone worthy of study, of having a work of art written about him. Not some inept, incompetent schmuck who’s obviously out of his league (along with his chosen minions), who snuck into office & who most non-sheeple could predict was but an example of the Peter Principle.

But all my friends & relatives, even the hard-core sheeple, who thought that a new day was dawning in Nov 2008, should consider this:

Obama has failed to restore faith in government:

Politico:

For five years, this president has been making the case that a growing and activist government has good intentions and can carry these intentions out with competence. Conservatives have warned that government is dangerous, and even good intentions get bungled in the execution. In different ways, the IRS uproar, the Justice Department leak investigations, the Benghazi tragedy and the misleading attempts to explain it, and the growing problems with implementation of health care reform all bolster the conservative worldview.

James Pethokoukis | May 15, 2013, 11:16 am

Hey, he even has a chart:

[Omitted]

All this is coming out now because the LSM could not hide it (in fact here they, themselves, were dissed) as they can with most things that would hurt Dems. As Charles Krauthammer described the Obamaites & the LSM,


“the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.”

Krauthammer did disagree with me on FOX tonite. He said:

“…[Obama] is losing his constituency, that’s the media…[which he] counted on, correctly, after Benghazi, to be uninterested and to cover for him… Well, that’s over. They feel attacked by what was done to the AP, that they feel duped over Benghazi, and everybody’s angry over the IRS.”

But, I do not discount the inattention or the stupidity of the American people & the worship of the slobbering LSM which may give up too soon, & so The Anointed ╬Ćne may well survive.

As long as he stays away from that gun banning which, rather than all that is scandalous now, will be his downfall a la Bush 43 with SS. As we have seen, the gun people are not low-info & recognize more than ever now how these so-called “background check” barrel-shroud bills would work. This “arrogant moral elite”, thru Bureaucrat 101, would deny gun ownership to most applicants, seeing them as troublesome people as the IRS did with Tea Partiers. You know the people formerly known as “the paranoid wingnut teabaggers who actually think the IRS is out to get them”.



pm317 said...

I just want to know where Obama was that night and what he did.

MadisonMan said...

Thanks all, that explains it!

The number of times I dove into water, not really knowing what was there.

pm317 said...

May be he was watching the news like we all were that night and 'getting' the news. You and I watch the news and then do nothing, because we can't.. he?

Meade said...

pm317 said...
"I just want to know where Obama was that night and what he did."

Until he gives us a complete and honest accounting of those things, he will have zero credibility. Only if he does give us a complete accounting will the country be able to move forward.

Synova said...

I thought we knew very well where he was and what he did.

He said something to the tune of "take care of it, do everything you can" and then he went to bed to rest up for his trip to Vegas to have a fundraiser.

He's had another couple of those this week, hasn't he? Or one this week and another celebrity bash to raise money scheduled for next week?

bagoh20 said...

There are the three basic questions about Benghazi: Why was this administration's performance so abysmally bad and dishonest before, during, and after the attack. Three huge failures in a row with one challenge. I think all three were a direct result of political calculations that were just flat out wrong and exactly wrong at each stage. They were bad decisions at or near the top to under-protect, not fight, and to lie to the public because they either felt they had a better plan or they simply failed to act.

I mean this seriously. Both Obama and Hillary are just incompetent, and over their heads. I think it's really that simple. Does either one have any history of success beyond identity electoral victories? None. It is exactly what you would expect from each's resume' or the combination.

I don't think there is any mystery to this. It's no surprise it happened, and it's no surprise they won't cop to it. That's exactly what you would expect from them both.

Lem said...

I just want to know where Obama was that night and what he did.

I believe he went to sleep.

bagoh20 said...

It's no real crime that he went to sleep. He doesn't command the blow by blow operations, but there was either an order or an understanding that nothing was going to be done that night. If that wasn't understood, then he would have been woken up. It would be really bad if that much of a disaster could be happening, and his people knew he would still not want woken up, which is possible.

bagoh20 said...

It's a specific and direct failure of leadership if your subordinates don't know to, or are afraid to, get you involved in a situation that critical.

PianoLessons said...

I gotta say - I'm impressed with the comments here. I think I agree with all of them but Meade ripping on Hillary's oily hair.

Two things I'd like to throw in: I now believe (suspected but now kind of "know") that American voters were robbed of truth (Benghazi lies) and free speech (IRS suppression of ideologically "not Obama-like groups).

I was actually surprised at the lack of organized Tea Party groups in last election - now I know why.

Next: I guess I think Romney would have won if there had not been this kind of Chicago thug politics going on in Obama's House...

I come from Chicago where we had to put a sic pack of beer on a trashbin to get it picked up in a timely manner. True story. I have many.

John Kass Chicago Trib writer has the best piece today: Short version: Obama is A Chicago Politician.....what did you all imagine he ever was?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0515-20130515,0,6512126.column


A good read.


David said...

"Let the facts speak for themselves."

Novel idea. And a good idea. What do you remember about Watergate? What the Democrats were saying? Or the facts that were developed in the various investigations?

Facts are impressive. Rhetoric rarely is.

David said...

" Lem said...
I just want to know where Obama was that night and what he did.

I believe he went to sleep"

Yeah, but with whom?

David said...

I'm not kidding. Where was the guy?

Jangwoo Lee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jangwoo Lee said...

And this isn’t in the mainstream media because…?
Didn’t every major news outlet send reporters to Alaska to stand in line and wait for boxes of Sarah Palin’s emails? But this? Nothing.
www.thekoreanlawblog.com

edutcher said...

Lem said...

The emails (100 selected out of over 2500)

You mean they didn't release everything?


Don't worry, the ones they did release still make liars out of them.

Issob Morocco said...

Why the video question is now more pressing with this release and the lack of discussion of it.

Why the video? Was this a Chicago style political hit on Romney gone bad? Hijacked by Muslim Brotherhood and their AQ buds?

Knowing the use of discreet bartender videos by Dem activists to get Romney was this just another of Obama's tricks to hammer Romney? The media certainly bit hard on the Romney critique of the Cairo Embassy PAO's condemnation of riots which had not yet happened, in the 5 days prior to when Rice doubled down on the video angle.

Who was Obama talking with on that evening of the murders? Axelrod? We still have not gotten all of the records of who visited, texted, or emailed him. For a group who took such pains to avoid official, traceable meetings by meeting lobbyists at Starbucks, was a campaign worker receiving communication and passing it to Obama?

If you answer "Why the video", the whole story unfolds.

C R Krieger said...

I would like to know who made the decision to try and shred the First Amendment, by going after the videographer (jerk that he was) and then going on to vilify him and his video in a way that some might see as a signal that the USG will not support those who criticize Islam or its Prophet.

Well, that and what CNN's Candy Crowley now thinks.

Regards  —  Cliff

James said...

@wyo_sis and Lem:

I doubt Obama went to sleep. The initial attacks on the consulate started at approximately 3:40 p.m. EST, and the annex a few hours later. It wasn't even dinner time for seniors in Boca; so its a mystery what Obama was doing once the first attacks started.

And its not like they didn't know what was occurring... Charlotte Lamb testified that the State Dept. had live video feeds from the consulate's security cameras, and a surveillance drone was on the scene 20 minutes after the attack on the consulate started.

AprilApple said...

I'd like all of the democrats here to listen to Krauthammer's questions - and then answer them.

AprilApple said...

Just be quiet and let the unprofessional pro-democrat hack media continue to cover for Obama.

Rusty said...

garage mahal said...
Why aren't we discussing the BIG Benghazi emails released today?

Oh, I know why. This is a stupid ginned up pseudo scandal and there was nothing in them.


Secret routers? Hugely morally reprehensible.
Four dead in Benghazi?
Nuthin we can do. They had it comin. Move along.

See why people think you're a joke here?

Aridog said...

John Lynch asked ...

Couldn't some military commander have responded on their own initiative? Why didn't they? The lack of leadership troubles me.

It is very likely that at least one did and was advised promptly that such action was **not authorized at this time** by higher officials. The crisis notification went to many high ranking offices, all of whom knew of the pre-planned responses. There is always a pre-planned response, with multiple alternatives, for crisis...such as any illuminated by a CRITIC message as @ The Drill SGT has properly described it. In this case the plan was short stopped...e.g., not hard to just ring up commander X or Y and say that said response plans are not authorized for this crisis.

Drago said...

garage: "Why aren't we discussing the BIG Benghazi emails released today?

Oh, I know why. This is a stupid ginned up pseudo scandal and there was nothing in them."

The "BIG" email release contained only a small portion of all the emails and NONE of the emails within the first 60 some odd hours after the crisis.

Which is precisely the time when the most questionable activities occurred.

Good old garage.

He simply jumps whenever he's told.

Most interesting is that this small subset of emails STILL disproves the WH talking points.

This is the best they can do.

Aridog said...

pm317 said...

I just want to know where Obama was that night and what he did.

It is acknowledged that Obama met with Panetta and Gen. Dempsey. Gen Dempsey then telephoned his go to guy for crisis and notified Reuters of the call and content before Noon EDT 12 September...the offensive video narrative was set in motion at that time...even Huffington Post published it.

Hagar said...

And I still want to know why the "terrorists" attacked in Benghazi to start with.

Aridog said...

Hagar said...

And I still want to know why the "terrorists" attacked in Benghazi to start with.

We're sorry, but that was a long time ago...and anyway, neither John Brennan nor Tom Donilon are available for comment because shut up.

Hagar said...

We are not getting anywhere yammering about the cover up of events after the attack.
We need to find out why they were so desperate to cover up that there had been an attack in the first place!

Writ Small said...

For those wondering about the context of Krauthammer's advice to Republicans, Bill Kristol was very critical of Karl Rove's video.

Leland said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Crunchy Frog said...

Screw the talking points issue. I want to know why my government abandoned its personnel.

Uriah the Hittite could not be reached for comment.

Chuck said...

Charles Krauthammer is exactly right.

But there is a reason why there is an air of hysteria surrounding Benghazi, that is not attributable to Republicans. Rather, it is the mainstream media's constant reference to the story in terms of what Republicans are demanding, or what Republicans are claiming.

The mainstream media is deliberately treating the story as one of a political debate. They don't always do that. The mainstream media, when it wants to, drops the reference to sides in a debate. And they take on the role of the prosecutor, demanding answers and seeking truth. In doing that, they take on a different role, and the story takes on a different cast. No one thinks about the story anymore as a partisan divide. Instead, they think about the subject of the story (i.e., the Obama Administration in this case) as being suspect, and the news media as our hero/agents, fighting for the truth.

It's not happening with Benghazi, until the press is invested. The press' repeatedly saying, "Congressional Republicans claim..." foils the story.

Amit Parashar said...

casinos room
Pretty sure he will have a good read.