Is it out of stupidity or malevolence?

Filed in National by on May 16, 2013

With today’s GOP, it is typically both. This Benghazi BS couldn’t make that more clear.

Check out these poll results, and Attaturk’s take below.

A whopping 41 percent of Republicans polled think the Obama administration’s handling of Benghazi is the greatest scandal in U.S. history. “One interesting thing about the voters who think Benghazi is the biggest political scandal in American history,” PPP adds, “is that 39% of them don’t actually know where it is. 10% think it’s in Egypt, 9% in Iran, 6% in Cuba, 5% in Syria, 4% in Iraq, and 1% each in North Korea and Liberia with 4% not willing to venture a guess.”

Greatest.Scandal.Ever.  Say the living embodiments of Comic-Book Guy.

Yeah, it’s like 12 Benedict Arnolds; 9 XYZ Affairs; 88 Nullification Crises; 35 Mexican-American Wars; like 55,000 Civil Wars; 3,000 Credit Mobiliers; 875 Spanish Flus; 300 Teapot Domes; 84,000 Great Depressions; 9 Million Pearl Harbors; 3,400 Tonkin Gulf Resolutions; 4 billion Watergates; 9 Trillion Iran-Contras; a mere 1.05 Monica Lewinskis; an infinity of Iraq War Resolutions over WMD; and 456 Bankster Induced Economic Collapses — ALL WRAPPED UP INTO ONE.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (67)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. John Young says:

    88 Nullification Crises, a bit dramatic no?

    Go Gamecocks!

  2. puck says:

    Yeah but how many Democrats? Repubs aren’t voting for us anyway. This is not a situation that is amenable to logic.

    Without a jobs surge, Democrats have been vulnerable to bullshit like this all along.

  3. puck says:

    Steven Miller will testify before Congress today in the IRS hearings, and I just have one question for him: “Just what the hell is a ‘pompatus?’ May I remind you you are under oath, sir.”

  4. Delaware Dem says:

    Stupidity on the part of the base. Malevolence on the part of the leaders.

  5. fightingbluehen says:

    They lied and mislead the public for obvious political reasons. So I guess we should just give the administration a pass, right?
    This blind allegiance you have for your party is very admirable.

  6. Tom McKenney says:

    It was great to see Eric Holder call out Rep. Issa. Issa is a typical bully. When Holder did not let him have the last word after a snarky comment, Issa called on the Chair to make Holder stop.

  7. fightingbluehen says:

    So why did the administration blame the attacks on a youtube video anyway? Anybody have an answer for that one yet……I didn’t think so.

  8. Dorian Gray says:

    @FBH… yeah, they initially played this line about that nonsense video and the protests in Cairo… very true. But then they corrected themselves within a few days time, maybe it was a week. Granted they muffed it, but is it a greater scandal than Watergate? Is it even a scandal? It’s fucking awful that the ambassador and those Marines were killed, but really isn’t just a mistake rather than a scandal? They were in a fucking war zone. The country just overthrew the government and the ambassador explicitly said he didn’t want a large military/security presence. What’s the scandal?

  9. Dorian Gray says:

    The AP phone records deal… on the other hand…

  10. SussexAnon says:

    “They lied and mislead the public for obvious political reasons. So I guess we should just give the administration a pass, right?
    This blind allegiance you have for your party is very admirable.”

    Oh the irony of this statement. Copy at paste this over at DP, its more appropriate there.

    And you are an idiot with no reading comprehension or memory skills if you think this blog gives a pass to Democrats.

  11. fightingbluehen says:

    But then they corrected themselves within a few days time, maybe it was a week.

    They still haven’t corrected themselves.

  12. puck says:

    In the end “Benghazi” will come to mean the altered emails scandal.

  13. cassandra_m says:

    What fbh won’t do — because it will make him actually think — is to read all of the emails that the White House released on Wednesday. There’s no there there, and never was. But then, fbh have never minded looking like a fool at the expense of the talking points pointed at *him*.

    What is interesting to me is that as of today, Benghazi seems to have quite dissapeared from the front pages of most of the major papers I see, and even NPR couldn’t rouse itself to talk about this except as a breathless scandal roundup by Mara Elliason.

  14. geezer says:

    @FBH: No matter how fast your hand moves, it’s still just jerking off.

  15. fightingbluehen says:

    But why did they say it was the youtube video? As if we didn’t already know.
    Still no answers.

  16. cassandra_m says:

    Geezer wins the internets today.

  17. geezer says:

    “But why did they say it was the youtube video?”

    If you’ll recall, there were demonstrations in several cities that day, and the youtube video was one of the things the protesters were hollering about. The world is so much more interesting when you’re capable of seeing the whole thing.

  18. Dorian Gray says:

    They said it was a YouTube video because there were huge protests about it in Cairo and elsewhere at the very same time… so they made a mistake in spinning a story. Look I’m no fan of parsing words, splitting hairs, spin doctoring, etc… but that’s the game. You can’t hate the player… and it certainly isn’t a “scandal”. It’s just that easy.

    And they have corrected themselves. It wasn’t the video it was an attack by a small band of Islamic guys… this was known well before the election… again… where’s the issue? To lump this situation in with explictly criminal behavior like Watergate, Iran Contra, torture black site… I mean it makes you look like a fool.

  19. xyz says:

    Who cares?

    After today’s revelations that the WH Counsel knew of the IRS abuse months ago, and that the IRS executive in charge of auditing tax exempts is now implementing Obamacare?

    You just can’t make this stuff up.

  20. xyz says:

    That sound you hear? Obamacare swirling around the bowl…

  21. pandora says:

    “Obamacare” is fine. Keep kidding yourself that it’s not.

    As far as the IRS thing… bring it on. Maybe then we can stop pretending that these groups were “social welfare” groups. If the only thing that comes out of this is a stricter definition of 501c groups, then that’s fine with me.

  22. xyz says:

    Fine. What will your snarky little comment be when it is shown that the WH counsel knew of this and did not immediately inform the President?

  23. socialistic ben says:

    Because the IRS was looking into organizations who gave them every reason to believe they would be trying to cheat taxes… since they were founded by known tax cheats.
    You see a young man in “gang cloths” and you suspect them of being in a gang… no one really bats an eye when police question kids all wearing the same color bandanna and making odd gestures with their hands…. but when rich white men display known criminal behavior…. you better let em do it OR ELSE! This topic is boring. This is still the MSM having a sad because Obama wont invite them over to watch TV.

  24. geezer says:

    Funny thing about these scandals — except for the people who told us that Fast and Furious and Solyndra also were bigger scandals than Watergate, nobody cares. Haters gonna hate.

  25. xyz says:

    Sure ben, keep telling yourself that.

    Obama himself admitted that the IRS behaviour was unacceptable.

    All of the conservative applicants were tax cheats? Really? You know this how?

  26. geezer says:

    “What will your snarky little comment be when it is shown that the WH counsel knew of this and did not immediately inform the President?”

    It will be “who gives a shit?” Administrations have been spying on liberals for years. Turnabout is fair play.

  27. geezer says:

    Sniff, sniff. Poor widdle conservatives.

    If you weren’t a bunch of America-haters, you would have nothing to worry about.

  28. socialistic ben says:

    Im sure not ALL of them were. But a conservative talking point is how they dont want to pay taxes…. if i own a store and someone walks in loudly talking about how money is an illusion and we shouldn’t have to pay for things and everything should be free… guess who gets followed around.
    I think Obama was wrong to make that statement. He shold have been highlighting how the GOP in congress has prevented adequate staffing of the IRS administration…. or how the conservative SCOTUS made it so all these shadow groups could exists and donate millions and millions with no accountability.

  29. xyz says:

    So this justifies targeting conservative tax exempts, and not targeting liberal tax exempts?

    Seriously?

    “Prevented adequate staffing of the IRS”

    Now there’s a hoot.

    You clowns are like a comedy act.

  30. socialistic ben says:

    Oh right. liberals have never been targeted. k.

  31. xyz says:

    Yes. They were. And a President was impeached when this happened.

    So go ahead and make your next inane point…

  32. Geezer says:

    No, x, George Bush wasn’t impeached when he targeted the NAACP.

    The reason you’re so outraged is that you’re so ill-informed.

    Now you’re going to find out that nobody cares to defend your little bands of misfits. Real people think the whole tax-exempt thing is an outrage, and just another example of how people like you game the system.

    Of course, learning all this would require you to leave your little bubbles of resentment. You poor little hothouse flowers.

  33. xyz says:

    Geez, up the dosage.

    Real people could care less about tax exempts.

    However, they do hate the IRS. And this whole episode gives them more reason to hate the IRS.

    Absolutely pitch-perfect issue to fire up the base for the 2014 midterms.

  34. socialistic ben says:

    Yup. Just like Benghazi won you the 2012 election….. and just like how Clinin to Guns won you 2008. Keep pinning your electoral hopes and dreams on fake scandals that only you can see…. please keep doing it.

  35. xyz says:

    No, Benghazi didn’t lose the election. It was successfully covered up by the kiddie corps in the White House.

    But they will have a little bit tougher job in whitewashing this IRS scandal.

    Stay tuned, KosKids.

  36. Geezer says:

    “However, they do hate the IRS. And this whole episode gives them more reason to hate the IRS.”

    They only hate the IRS when it’s after them. And if it’s after the Tea Party, it’s not after them. There’s another thing people hate as much as the IRS — tax cheats. And this “scandal” does a good job of linking the terms “Tea Party” and “tax cheats.”

  37. Geezer says:

    “They will have a little bit tougher job in whitewashing this IRS scandal.”

    You need a towel to clean up after your happy ending?

  38. Jason330 says:

    SB says keep pinning your dreams on fake scandals and XYZ essentially says, “okay”

    Classic!

  39. pandora says:

    Yeah, the Tea Party and 9/12 Patriots were “social welfare” non-political 501c groups. Keep digging. I’m all for this!

  40. Geezer says:

    Here’s the lead on the Gallup Poll on the scandals:

    “Slim majorities of Americans are very or somewhat closely following the situations involving the Internal Revenue Service (54%) and the congressional hearings on the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and its aftermath (53%) — comparatively low based on historical measures of other news stories over the last two decades. … Despite extensive news coverage of these stories in recent days, the level of attention being paid to each is below the average 60% of Americans who have closely followed more than 200 news stories Gallup has measured over the past several decades.”

  41. xyz says:

    “This scandal does a good job of linking the terms Tea Party and tax cheats”

    Whatever you say, Geez.

    Maybe you should switch the meds around once in a while. Give the voices a little rest.

  42. Geezer says:

    Read the comment above with the Gallup poll. I’m right, you’re wrong. Too bad you have nothing to add to your RNC talking points.

    As Pandora points out, the more this “scandal” is aired, the more people will realize that you’re a bunch of tax cheats. And keep in mind that the public dislikes the Tea Party by a 2-1 margin.

  43. puck says:

    Maybe if the IRS stopped apologizing they could give a clearer explanation.

  44. xyz says:

    OK Pandora, you’ve already let us know that you are OK with the IRS supressing free speech of those that you don’t politically agree with. Chime back in when you have something of interest to contribute.

  45. Geezer says:

    It has nothing to do with free speech, moron. Nobody was preventing them from speaking. They were preventing them from claiming tax-exempt status. Big difference, though of course Tea Party morons who love the Constitution but don’t understand it will keep crying like babies.

    Go play with your rattle.

  46. xyz says:

    Geez – go read Citizen’s United v the Federal Election Commission. Or at least the grade school version.

    Then get back to me.

    I thought the smart liberals hung out here.

    Is Geez on your varsity or is he a second stringer?

  47. cassandra_m says:

    Citizen’s United doesn’t say that speech needs to be tax free.

    It would help if you would join the smart commenter crew, x. You might get a clue.

  48. pandora says:

    I have nothing against free speech, but that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about political groups pretending to be UNICEF.

  49. puck says:

    After reading this a few days I’m not convinced the IRS did anything wrong. First of all, checking out organizations likely to violate tax rules is their JOB. The IRS always profiles and uses various flags for extra attention.

    Secondly, I haven’t seen anything that actually demonstrates conservative groups were flagged more than statistically expected. Were the numbers excessive compared with what? How many non-political groups were flagged?

    Reportedly 90 conservative groups and at least 3 left-leaning groups were flagged. Sounds like an imbalance, right? Not until you know how many of each were applying.

    I don’t know all the factors that would go into a real statistical analysis. Paging Nate Silver…

  50. xyz says:

    No, we are talking about a government that is targeting individuals and organizations for scrutiny based upon their political orientation.

  51. pandora says:

    Oh, I’m sorry. Did you say “political orientation”? That’s a big no-no when it comes to 501c(4). NO Politics allowed. Keep digging.

  52. xyz says:

    OK puck, keep drinking the koolaid.

    If nothing wrong happened, why did it take Obama just 2 days to shove the acting head of the IRS under a bus? Before the hearings even started?

    I thought you guys were reality based. Open your eyes, sport.

  53. xyz says:

    Yeah sure, No politics allowed in 501c(4). Well, no conservative politics anyway. Just drop the name “progressive” or “community” or “green” into your organization’s name instead of “conservative”. Hello tax-exempt status.

  54. puck says:

    How is the IRS supposed to vet groups for 501(c)(4) status anyway? See:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/14/lets-back-up-how-is-the-irs-supposed-to-scrutinize-501c4s-anyway/

    I hope Democrats are smart enough to insist on a 501(c)(4) fix attached to any budget. Now there’s tax reform I can live with.

  55. Geezer says:

    “we are talking about a government that is targeting individuals and organizations for scrutiny based upon their political orientation.”

    Been happening for years. This is just the first time your team got targeted. Our team has been targeted for years, and for less reason. Open your own eyes, sport.

    And if you want to insult my intelligence, you’ll first have to say something — anything — original. No conservative has ever passed that test.

  56. Geezer says:

    Now try to deal with the fact that these “scandals” are being ignored by the public. Go read the Gallup poll and get back to me.

    Or would that interfere with your heavy schedule of whining and foot-stamping?

  57. Jason330 says:

    I’m sad the public is going to ignore the fact that the edited emails came out of a GOP congress and office. The other stuff – not so much.

  58. puck says:

    I’m sad that Dems will never go on the attack and make the faked emails an election albatross for Republicans. Faked emails to politically damage Democrats? That’s the real new Watergate.

  59. Dave says:

    Seems to me that ABC needs to reveal their source for the faked emails. Unless they want to protect a source that lied to them.

    The pressure should be put on ABC and the means to do that is to boycott ABC until they put up. Ratings is what they love and maybe if the ratings go down, they will find that loving their source will conflict with love of ratings.

  60. Tom McKenney says:

    xyz…typical nonsense several liberal groups were not given tax exempt status while all the parties flagged by the IRS were.

    Now Issa wants to have hearings in private. That way he can still tell lies and not be exposed in public.

  61. cassandra_m says:

    Unless they want to protect a source that lied to them.

    Tell that to Judy Miller. Major Garrett at CBS was pretty clear that it was Republicans who provided the false statements/doctored emails. Outing a bad source would make sense to me, but this isn’t how these guys roll.

  62. dem dementia says:

    Let’s ask Ambassador Stevens what he thinks about the scandal. OOOPs, Obama’s stupidity let him die.

    Anyway, as Hillary Rotten Clinton said, “what does it matter”?

  63. Liberal Elite says:

    @dd “Obama’s stupidity let him die.”

    Really?? Wasn’t it the GOP who cut funding for embassy security? And wasn’t it a GOP congressman who leaked to our enemies that the site was a CIA operation??

    Let’s be honest about who really blew this thing..

  64. Liberal Elite says:

    @fbh “They lied and mislead the public for obvious political reasons. So I guess we should just give the administration a pass, right?”

    Thats what the GOP did for Bush… They INSISTED on it, again and again and again. And Bush’s lies cost MANY dollars and MANY lives.

    The thing that makes the GOP look so bad, is that they never had the moral high ground on this.

  65. SussexAnon says:

    As much as I feel bad for the Ambassador and others killed in the attack, Americans need to stop being surprised when the locals get pissed off with us meddling in their neighborhood.

    You mess with the bull, you get the horns. Especially when you have killed or displaced hundreds of thousands in the region.