Skip to main content

Would you both please join me in a short walk through history?

2001 - The president goes on his 37th vacation, this time beginning in August. His National Security Council Advisor not only ignored Clinton's experts when she began, she did not know enough to realize what the real threat to the US was. With CIA warnings about an expected strike within our borders coming to her and to the President, you might rightly suspect that they had notice. Official, candid, real notice of an upcoming attack on this country.

Then, 9/11 happened. Several planes were stolen, almost mimic'ing a Tom Clancy novel. They aimed at the financial center of the US and A. They aimed at our military center. They aimed at us.

What was your response? Whose heads did you demand? Bush's? Cheney's? Rice's? No, wait. I remember. NONE OF THE ABOVE.

It got worse.

Condi began sputtering meaningless crap about mushroom clouds, a term you know they taste-tested before a focus group before they aired it.

Let's move to the invasion of Afghanistan. On one hand, we had clear headed advise from the likes of Senator Kerry, calling for investigations, well directed, and intel based police actions. ON the other, we had blood lust in the eyes of the GOP elected officials.  Geez, I wonder how that turned out.

Ron Dumsfeld managed to screw up a workable plan, one that would have cornered the Al Qaida operatives, including Bin Laden, and instead turned it into a future mire of quag. A fustercluck so fantastic that books will be written about the fiasco. He understaffed, undermanned, and undermined the whole project, and even so, on the verge of some semblance of victory, he stabbed the whole operation in the heart, just so he could fulfill his real plan - a little iraqi invasion.

What was your response? Whose heads did you demand? Bush's? Cheney's? Rice's? Rummies? No, wait. I remember. NONE OF THE ABOVE.

Let's turn to a few details. Say, WMD. You know, the ones that Rummie and Condi EFFING GUARANTEED WERE THERE! The ones that Saddam Hussein was to use against the mainland of USandA, even though he had no navy, no air force, no missiles, no long range weapons at all, and no way to deliver them.

To say that Condi and Rummie were mistaken (if not out and out liars) is like saying the Romney is a pompous prig.

We lost thousands of more lives because of that fiasco. Because of the lies from Condi and Cheney and Rummie.

What was your response? Whose heads did you demand? Bush's? Cheney's? Rice's? Rummies? No, wait. I remember. NONE OF THE ABOVE.

How did you deal with an ineffective, arrogant, barely functioning NSC head? Did you call for her resignation? Did you call for a special commission? (Not the whitewash version that you heartily approved, but a real one) Did either of you demand her head?

What was your response? Whose heads did you demand? Bush's? Cheney's? Rice's? Rummies? No, wait. I remember. NONE OF THE ABOVE.

No, you pathetic POS. You both strongly supported her promotion to SexState.

To give you an idea just how badly she served the nation there, how often she pissed off friends and fiends alike, how badly she ran that critically important department, recall how Hillary Clinton was greeted after she was assigned. With rousing cheers. Nations fell over themselves (saying about time, and thanks) to greet her as well. Condi was so bad, so out of touch, so ineffective, that we are lucky that no major war broke out. Perhaps people were so afraid of her incompetence, that they simply tried to wait her reign out.

What was your response? Whose heads did you demand? Bush's? Cheney's? Rice's? Rummies? No, wait. I remember. NONE OF THE ABOVE.

Now, look at yourselves, you pathetic, parasitic, partisan pissants.  Ambassador Rice simply repeated what the CIA was telling her. Had she not, you would have screamed for her head. But she did her duty, even though she had not one bit of involvement in Benghazi and the unfortunate deaths of four Americans. (How many died during 9/11? more than 4?)

And you bastards demand her head.

May I suggest that your priorities are as fucked up as your party? Politely, of course.

Poll

Is bipartisanshit dead?

18%15 votes
8%7 votes
0%0 votes
45%37 votes
4%4 votes
15%13 votes
4%4 votes
2%2 votes
0%0 votes

| 82 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (26+ / 0-)

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:20:51 AM PST

  •  it's an attempt to neuter the prez on what (8+ / 0-)

    is now his very strong foreign policy strength. Think Rove saying you should attack your opponents' strength. He got bin Laden, so attack now even if the opening can only be seen with an electron microscope, and then only because of the 24-7 screamfest that is fauxnews etc. howling Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghaz1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Pathetic weasels. J McC, I for one will never forget or forgive your willingness to make the most incompetent and dangerous political candidate in history your running mate - and yes, I even include Dan Quayle on that list. Your running mate was THE worst, most unfit person for high office in our history. And YOU picked her for quasi-president. Now you know what I think of your and your fellow concern troll's advice. Stuff it.

    Fear is the mind-killer - Frank Herbert, Dune

    by p gorden lippy on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:35:36 AM PST

    •  Agree to everything. (5+ / 0-)

      But, while a palinesque vice presi-duncey was scary, I think W outdid McCain with his VP choice. Stupid and arrogant is bad enough, but evil and sly is far, far worse.

      What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

      by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:39:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is it really you? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        agnostic, glorificus, Justus

        Nice to have you back.

        Did you get any explanation from the admins about the hijacked diary the other day? It's scary to think that one can be impersonated online.

        Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

        by OIL GUY on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:46:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  tis moi. in fool farce. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          glorificus, Justus, OIL GUY

          What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

          by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:55:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  silly mois. too simple of a password (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Justus, OIL GUY

          I did it so many years ago, that I never gave it another thought.

          Because all my apple product talk to each other and share my passwords, I never bothered to change it. as I said, silly moi.

          What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

          by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:33:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I better reevauate my shit. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            agnostic

            It's not rocker science.

            Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

            by OIL GUY on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 11:33:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  heh, what bothers me is what I do. (0+ / 0-)

              I've taught several continuing legal education classes for other lawyers. my last two classes involve office management, computer use and using the ipad in the courtroom. In each seminar, i stress using hard passwords, changing them frequently, and other safety moves.

              and guess who did not follow what they preach? duh.

              What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

              by agnostic on Fri Nov 16, 2012 at 08:11:27 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  vice presi-duncey...LOL (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        agnostic, glorificus

        well played!

        Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

        by Cedwyn on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 11:48:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  and I agree, except that in this case, McPain (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        agnostic, glorificus

        is all het up about competence. Cheney was effective, in that he destroyed several countries and our energy policies according to plan, something I don't believe Ms. P could have even come close to achieving, evil intentions notwithstanding.

        Fear is the mind-killer - Frank Herbert, Dune

        by p gorden lippy on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 12:17:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  It's About Politics (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    agnostic, glorificus, Justus

    Liars Little Lindsey Graham and McCain are trying to push Pres Obama to pick Kerry for SoS so they can have a shot at getting Scott Brown back into the Senate.  Kerry probably is the smart pick, but now it would give me pleasure if BO would stick Rice right up their asses.

  •  Two Little Pint Sized Joe McCarthys...... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kurious, agnostic, DianeNYS, Justus

    Not again.....the vile, embittered John McCain just popped his angry self out of his hidey hole this week.  His little sidekick, Miss Lindsey, is equally skin crawling.

    These two nuts are determined to besmirch Ms Rice & destroy her reputation & career just to please FOX News, Rush Limbaugh & the Tea Baggers they serve.

    I would love to see the President call them to the WH.  They sit down & the President enters w/ Ambassador Rice.

    Say it to her face, gentlemen.  

  •  Apparently Kent Conrad spoke out (4+ / 0-)

    In defense of Sec. Rice today, heard it on the Ed show.

    Can't wait for the egg on the face moment when the facts are presented. Bullies, both of them.

    'Well-behaved women seldom make history” Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

    by dear occupant on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 11:06:29 AM PST

  •  3,000 civln deaths on bush's watch; 10 terrorist.. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    agnostic, DianeNYS, Justus

    attacks on Reagan's watch including the:

    ...bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut; 63 people died, including 17 Americans...

    ...Bombing of Marine barracks in Beirut...241 U.S. Marines were killed and more than 100 others wounded...

    ...Bombing of US Embassy in Kuwait...Six people were killed...

    ...CIA Station Chief William Buckley kidnapped..in Lebanon...30 Westerners would be kidnapped during the 10-year-long Lebanese hostage-taking crisis..some, including Buckley, died in captivity...

    ...Bombing of U.S. Embassy annex northeast of Beirut...killing 24 people...

    Hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 221...Hijacking of TWA Flight 847...(a U.S. Navy diver, was shot and his body dumped on the airport tarmac)...Hijacking of cruise ship Achille Lauro;
    Bombing of Rome, Vienna airports...Bombing of La Belle Discotheque...Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103... (All 259 people on board were killed, along with 11 on the ground)...

       
    Senators Graham & McCain:  What about that?  What about Bush and Reagan's abject failures to protect American citizens from terrorist attacks?  

    Why didn't republicans demand investigations of Bush's proven failure to heed multiple warnings about imminent terrorist threats from Osama Bin Laden/ al queda--a failure that cost over 3,000 American lives?

    Why didn't republicans demand investigations of Reagan's total ineffectiveness against terrorist attacks on Americans throughout his entire Presidency?  

    Why?  Could it be that republicans only "demand" "investigations" of Democratic Presidents? Could it be that both Graham and McCain are evil, bitter, political partisans who put partisan warfare ahead of the good of their country.

    Yes, I think that's it--Graham & McCain are republicans first and foremost, and Americans only when and if it pleases or somehow benefits them to be.

    •  those kind of numbers simply don't (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Justus, barkworsethanbite

      matter to Lindsey or John. Because all that matters is that Boy in our White House.

      Reality, election results, history? Means nothing, in comparison.

      I think we shall see ever more aggressive and disgusting signs of racism on the GOP side.

      What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

      by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 01:00:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Time for the Dems politicians to bring it all up-- (4+ / 0-)

        repeatedly, IMHO.  In fact, everytime Graham & McCain bring up Benghazi--the Dems need to bring up Bush/9-11 and Reagan/ 8 years of continual terror attacks--and the corresponding Republican Party silence about those failures.

        If I were a Democratic politician or spokesperson, each time I was asked about Bengazi, I would frame my answer in a larger picture:  "Many Presidents have had to deal with national security issues, including terrorist attacks.  

        Presidents Reagan and Bush both failed to prevent terrorist attacks, yet republicans now are expecting President Obama to do what neither Reagan nor Bush were able to do--some might call that hypocritical to say the least and politically opportunistic to state it accurately."

        In fact, Obama's record in preventing terrorist attacks is far better than either Reagan's or Bush's.  Those are the facts, and Democrats should not back down from making Graham and McCain hear those facts whenever they bring up Bengazi.  

        Another fact is that Reagan, Bush, and even Romney didn't/don't have any special talents or abilities to prevent terrorist attacks.  

        Neither do Graham or McCain--they just have the ability to "patriotically" use a terrorist attack as an opportunity to attack the POTUS.

        •  true, ku. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Justus, barkworsethanbite

          Before Patriot, before Homely Scrutiny Act, and before Transportation Sicko Aggravators, this used to be a free country.

          Since then, video surveillance is the norm, not the exception. I have no doubts that my emails are surveilled. I have no doubts that someone, somewhere, looks after my web searches. And i have absolutely no doubt that AI programs exist that can pretty accurately create an artificial me, good enough to predict my next move.

          With all that data, all that control and supervision, will we stop another terror attack, especially one by some homegrown terrorists? Most likely rabid right wing christian-based? Nope.

          From friends in the FBI and local police, I have heard that the threat levels against high ranking D pols and more so against the President have never ever been so high. Threats from fellow Americans.  These attacks by McCain and Graham do little more than drive that insane sector of our country into even higher levels of outrage.

          If the unthinkable would happen, and a nut would kill or injure the president, I wonder how Graham and McCain would react. Perhaps with a smile.

          What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

          by agnostic on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:08:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I haven't heard anyone else (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    agnostic, DianeNYS, Justus

    stepping up to the plate to declare that they agree with McCain and Graham or have I missed that?

    They have Kelly Ayotte joining in the news conferences.  What information would she have to declare that the hate film had nothing to do with the riots in Benghazi?  Or is she there to show that they're gaining backing?


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 11:32:22 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site