Skip to main content

Republicans could care less about the four Americans who died at Benghazi. Republicans have made a sport out of getting Americans killed overseas for years, competing over who can run up the death score the most. The new Bullghazi Committee has one purpose: gin-up turnout of the GOP base. So why, pray tell, would Democrats want to be a part of it?

But in Democratic circles — in private meetings, and conversations throughout the Capitol — the tide has turned.

Democrats want to be there to respond to Republicans, and stand up for the administration. One person they especially want to be in the room for: Hillary Clinton.

Democrats are aware the Republicans are certain to call the former secretary of State to testify, and if there are no Democrats present, the leading contender for the party’s 2016 presidential nomination would be walking into a minefield.

The scene in the Democratic whip meeting Thursday illustrated that dynamic. It was clear there that Democrats are beginning to see the upside in having representation on the panel.

Both Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who chaired the Oversight and Energy and Commerce committees, spoke in favor of appointing Democrats. They both mentioned Clinton, and Waxman also mentioned the prospect of National Security Adviser Susan Rice testifying.

Jesus Christ. You shouldn't be shocked at why this bunch can't get it right. Democrats in the minorty typically don't behave like a group thirsty for power, but like weak flowers that have lost their nutrients,  wilting and dying under even the best sunlight.

These House Dems are playing it all wrong. Yes, the Washington Media will show up at the hearings with tons of hype. Some Dems feel they need to be there to make sure this B movie with a second rate cast gets top billing. Well guess what, the GOP is counting on them being there. They want a bipartisan committee. Know why? Because this issue does nothing for Democrats. Absolutely nothing.

Democratic voters do not give a rats ass worth of cat piss about Benghazi. So if you want to depress Democratic turnout, go ahead and spend several months wasting time on this inside the beltway, Washington media circle jerk. Go ahead and drown your entire campaign over the Summer into a GOP conspiracy theory. Meanwhile, they will use it to gin their nutcase base up to the max.

My God people, House Dems, have you learned nothing from these guys? This all about driving GOP turnout, drowning out Democratic messaging, and wasting everyones time on foolishness. Why would you play along? Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice are perfectly capable of defending themselves. Leave them to it. No Washington media poodle is going to waste anytime covering your softball questions. They never do in these things.

Guys...leave them to their witch hunt. Dont give it any form of legitimacy. Why dont you guys, instead, get out in the country and talk things that Democratic voters give a shit about and stop tripping over your shoelaces to kiss up to Hillary Clinton. She's perfectly capable of handling these chumps all on her own.

7:52 AM PT: Update: Some suggest..put Alan Grayson and whatever other firebrand liberal on there to score points!

You dont get it do you? THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE GOP WANTS.

This isnt for our base. You think young people, minorities,  working people, working women, are going to be watching this foolishness? The only people who will are political junkies and the GOP base, old rich retired rural white people. People who are never going to vote for us, and will be even more encouraged to do so the more liberals wail on tv.

Once again, OUR COALITION DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THIS SHIT. We need to be speaking to our voters with things that will motivate them to vote and not waste time and energy on this stupidity. There are no votes to be gained here.

8:56 AM PT: From the comments:

The Termite  To believe it wise to play this game... (1+ / 0-)
...then you have to accept a few things as true:

1. The purpose of these hearings is to arrive at the truth.

2. The people in control of the hearing are of a fair mind, and wish to give the accused an opportunity to tell their side of the story.

3. Given an opportunity to tell their side of the story, the accused have a story that will satisfy the electorate, by proving a negative.

4. The media narrative about Benghazi has yet to be determined.

None of these things are true.

Many people in this thread have argued that not showing up is also a trap. That might be true. But it is the best way to control the story and the outcome. It makes a clear and unambiguous statement. If Sun Tzu were around there isn't a snowball's chance in hell he would advise walking into this trap. No way no how.

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 (288+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dood Abides, Crashing Vor, CwV, ERdoc in PA, annecros, zeke7237, maryabein, jacey, mikeconwell, tomephil, Habitat Vic, xxdr zombiexx, marking time, here4tehbeer, Yang Guang, democracy inaction, kurious, dewtx, skod, Bollox Ref, Ed in Montana, Proud Mom and Grandma, DerAmi, CoExistNow, titotitotito, temptxan, edsbrooklyn, The Marti, whl, Lying eyes, skillet, RandomNonviolence, Haningchadus14, reginahny, VA Breeze, EricS, NBBooks, Deward Hastings, jasan, mallyroyal, AoT, J M F, More Questions Than Answers, 88kathy, No one gets out alive, rexxnyc, Little Flower, SneakySnu, thenekkidtruth, Mystic Michael, Sylv, ChemBob, Radiowalla, psnyder, Byron from Denver, spunhard, Ian Reifowitz, miracle11, J Ash Bowie, mslat27, this is only a test, ipsos, dougymi, importer, leftykook, Joffan, Dartagnan, The Hindsight Times, terabytes, Medium Head Boy, edwardssl, Hayate Yagami, geebeebee, wa ma, muddy boots, Nebraska68847Dem, basquebob, Dr Swig Mcjigger, JBL55, ThatSinger, zerelda, Egalitare, owlbear1, Onomastic, Oh Mary Oh, SanFernandoValleyMom, majcmb1, profundo, LamontCranston, Involuntary Exile, jts327, Gary Norton, wdrath, PsychoSavannah, kevinpdx, caul, SteelerGrrl, Brooke In Seattle, Patate, kharma, mikeVA, gof, Sun Tzu, weaponsofmassdeception, Wisdumb, Joe Bacon, Hillbilly Dem, Anima, carolanne, Paragryne, ebbet, jck, Deep Texan, wonmug, wasatch, sillia, Penny GC, lastman, mkor7, expatjourno, Trendar, shaharazade, imicon, allensl, The Termite, slowbutsure, accumbens, cybersaur, mconvente, dandy lion, eagleray, shanikka, leonard145b, bostonjay, leeleedee, misshelly, jamess, bsmechanic, maggiejean, tdor66, mungley, ericlewis0, markthshark, implicate order, Miggles, BadKitties, Capt Crunch, annrose, MKinTN, raboof, quill, decisivemoment, camlbacker, YucatanMan, MikePhoenix, codairem, tom 47, TAH from SLC, TomFromNJ, bloomer 101, Jim R, koNko, nailbender, bakeneko, alba, lorikay4, cpresley, Laughing Vergil, tin woodswoman, Wreck Smurfy, FindingMyVoice, Front Toward Enemy, Jim P, ChocolateChris, Retroactive Genius, gizmo59, ceebee7, cassandraX, RUNDOWN, bwintx, fijiancat, FogCityJohn, golem, Simplify, Kevskos, nice marmot, dRefractor, Laconic Lib, Odysseus, john07801, ChuckChuckerson, glitterlust, DeminNewJ, Bryce in Seattle, defluxion10, katrinka, groupw, hfjai, 2dot, Meteor Blades, CaliSista, PaDemTerry, Little Lulu, ridemybike, Shockwave, Cat Servant, Doug in SF, Susan from 29, Darmok, middleagedhousewife, Prav duh, Lily O Lady, Whamadoodle, mnguitar, GreenInCalif, fb, diffrntdrummr, old wobbly, melfunction, OleHippieChick, dmhlt 66, Free Jazz at High Noon, UtahLibrul, LABobsterofAnaheim, greenbastard, carpunder, GAS, LaFeminista, Anne Elk, tofumagoo, banjolele, fToRrEeEsSt, rubyclaire, Libby Shaw, Glen The Plumber, devis1, anodnhajo, highacidity, dksbook, Hammerhand, Alice Olson, Simple, Steveningen, skyounkin, BlueDragon, Puddytat, Richard Villiers, peachcreek, Unitary Moonbat, Jersey Girl, AdamSelene, La Gitane, claude, where4art, i saw an old tree today, Notreadytobenice, dkmich, sotiredofusernames, mjd in florida, Ditch Mitch KY, lastamendment, CA Nana, llbear, devtob, nu2u, wolf advocate, TexDem, Jaimas, Sandika, wu ming, AverageJoe42, Jeff Y, Ravenstream, travelerxxx, newpioneer, outragedinSF, Santa Susanna Kid, FarEastLA, mudslide, HCKAD, ATFILLINOIS, Port City Moon, BlueZone, dotdash2u, exNYinTX, reasonshouldrule, BeninSC, OrpheusDude
  •  Gooper play book page they should steal... (58+ / 0-)

    ...they ought to be out there screaming economic/ACA success and even exaggerating it...

    Response to Benghazi is AMERICA is BACK!!! Thank you Obama! overandoverandoverandover....

    Dudehisattva...

    "Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"

    by Dood Abides on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:08:59 AM PDT

  •  Yes, she is. (13+ / 0-)

    And she is currently doing so by giving #Bencrazy all the non-attention which it deserves.

    I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

    by Crashing Vor on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:09:31 AM PDT

    •  Just like the Swiftboaters! (8+ / 0-)

      That was of course a brilliant move by Kerry, to ignore them.

      "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

      by kovie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:03:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, it wasn't. (21+ / 0-)

        He didn't have the smarts to say, at the start, "You're trying to distract from the fact that one of us served and the other went awol."

        She had the smarts to say, at the start, "It doesn't matter whether you believe my friend was killed because of protests or planned attack. My friend was killed and I won't let it happen again."

        I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

        by Crashing Vor on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:07:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Kerry is responsible for the Swiftboat mess. (12+ / 0-)

          He handled it poorly.  

          It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

          by Rich in PA on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:14:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Whether she or we like it or not (8+ / 0-)

          She's going to have to give a good answer to the only question that matters, whether the embassy was properly secured based on the best intelligence available at the time on potential threats to it, and if not, why.

          Whether or not she's already answered it doesn't matter if voters don't think she's answered it. I see this as an opportunity to turn the tables on Repubs and answer this question once and for all, in a way that satisfies most voters.

          We need to stop deluding ourselves that being angry at, mocking and then ignoring Repubs when they pull crap like this is an effective political strategy, when in reality it's largely about feeling superior to them.

          How's that been working for us?

          "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

          by kovie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:44:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  We actually haven't been ignoring them enough. (9+ / 0-)

            That's a big part of the problem.

            As for Hillary answering the Rethugs' questions - again for the cameras - it's already been done, and then some.  Participating in this charade any further will only help Republicans to resurrect something that's already been thoroughly debunked and over.

            What Democrats actually need to do is to stop allowing Republicans to yank their chains.  They need to stop dancing to the Republican's tune, and focus on their own agenda.  Now.  Finally.

            All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

            by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:04:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  We have not been calling their tactics what they (5+ / 0-)

              are.

              They are following a strategy of political sabotage for the last 30 years. Break the government's ability to protect people and then drown that shit in a bathtub so big money can have less taxes and more freedom to profit.

              Republicans don't believe in government and are doing their best to sabotage it.

              Ignoring them won't work. We need to call them out for sabotaging our future.

              Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

              by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:49:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  YES! But not by participating in their Kommittee. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                k9disc, TomFromNJ

                All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

                by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:17:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  It doesn't matter if they go on the committee or (4+ / 0-)

                  not if they bring the message of sabotage.

                  Think about it. It's not the committee it's the lack of something aggressive to say.

                  You pack that committee with 5 Dems, aggressive dems, who talk about sabotage repeatedly and preach the narrative of Republican saboteurs in the modern political era, and you've got a nice counter attack.

                  But sitting on the committee to simply protect Democrats or the Democratic brand is a bad idea.

                  Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                  by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:30:12 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I tend to agree (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    bobcat41702, k9disc

                    but after reading may of these posts it's become all too clear that there is a split here in how to handle this, leaning heavely to one side or the other, why aren't we talking about walking and chewing gum at the same time?
                    I agree we should have representatives at this Hearing but they need to be very highly placed Democrat's that can't be steam rolled by their Republican  "Friends Across The Aisle", thrown out of the committee for asking real questions or demanding their fair share of time. Another thing to consider here is that Dem's have always been portrayed by Repub's and Right Wing MSM as pussy's afraid to go to war over anything or stand firm in the face of fire and these accusations would be on target much of the time. The Repubs want war on everything, we need to adopt to this, in this case it's a matter of never leaving a Man/Woman behind.
                    If they boycott I can see the headlines in the Right Wing Media now, Dem's throw Hillery to the Lions, Dem's have no faith in Clinton now that she's been exposed as a liar, and it will get nastier.
                    At the same time the best idea I've seen here so far is to open hearings on some issues that are important to Dem's and might actually uncover a lot of dirt and yield results. I also agree that going as far back as Regan would be pointless, most Americans now can't remember who was in what position during the Regan Admin. and most likely couldn't even tell you who the VP was during Regan's reign of terror. It might be note worthy however to bring up the point that Regan backed the funding of the Pakistani resistance (Mujahideen) including bin Laden but personally I'd stay away from that Albatross s as it covers 3 presidencies and included a lot of prominent Democrats most notably Carter and Charlie Wilson.
                    I think the thing to do here is upset the apple cart, play Rand Paul's game of "Green Eggs and Ham" in other words sabotage the whole thing but do so using real talking points.
                    at the same time open up congressional hearings on a couple of Supreme Court Justices! Scalia being first and foremost and then Thomas. Scalia has reversed himself on more than a couple of cases he wrote winning decisions on in the past and is obviously not impartial where it comes to Racism and Religion. Take the spotlight off the Benghazi hearings and give the people a new shiny to look at.
                    I know many of you will say "well that's the same thing the Repub's are doing, wasting Taxpayer $$$ on stupid hearings but 1st I'll say it's time someone got serious about questioning the cognitive functionality of these judges as well as obvious conflicts of interests in the case of Thomas and Monsanto. I'll also tell you truthfully we have got to adapt to their way of war and fight Fire with Fire, it's the same concept of who has the most Nukes and does anyone dare push that button? Make it so these clowns think very long and hard before continuing on their present path.
                    If your gonna hold hearings on past political leaders make it Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and, as Rice will no doubt be part of this charade, it's a perfect opportunity to go there.
                    My question is does the Obama Admin have the what it takes to nail their balls to the outhouse door? and I ask that question sadly. Obama is an very good tactician but as with most Dem's he plays the Defensive game. It's time the Offense got off it's ass and started carrying their share of the weight.

                    "The Liberty of Democracy is not safe if the People tolerate the growth of Private Power to a point where it becomes stronger than their Democratic State itself. That, in it's essence, is Fascism, ownership of Government by an individual or a Group" FDR

                    by Kirk Welch on Fri May 09, 2014 at 03:10:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If you "fight fire with fire"... (0+ / 0-)

                      ...everybody gets burned.

                      While it might feel good to beat the Rethugs at their own game, it ultimately would be counterproductive.  Because engaging in even more "gotcha!" politics, by trying to sabotage GOP plays & ploys, only lowers the overall level of discourse, and promotes even more partisan bickering, dysfunction...and paralysis.

                      While it might seem counterintuitive, doing so would actually serve Republican interests very nicely.  How?  
                      It would directly support the Rethug narrative that "government doesn't work" - a scenario that they've been working as hard as they can to bring about.  We certainly ought not to be helping them.

                      While I am by no means suggesting that we should enable any of their little tantrums or tricks - in which case we should vigorously call them out, each and every time they step over the line - that doesn't mean that we should get suckered into playing their game.  It means we don't make tactical decisions based on what might, or might not, appear in the right-wing media headlines.  Because as soon as we start worrying about any of that bullshit, it means they've gotten into our heads.  I don't know about you, but the Rethugs are definitely not welcome to be tromping around inside my head.

                      We need to stick to our game plan - not theirs.  Take credit for the success of the ACA.  Continue to schedule votes in Congress on a minimum wage increase - and clobber Rethugs over the head for it every time they vote it down.  Continue to point out the role of the Koch Brothers & Sheldon Adelson in Rethug campaign finance, vs. the huge swell of small-donation public support that we enjoy via Act Blue, etc. etc.  Lather.  Rinse.  Repeat.

                      All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

                      by Mystic Michael on Sat May 10, 2014 at 09:08:56 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Speak TRUTH! Republicans are actively sabotaging (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            OleHippieChick, snwflk, Silina, claude

            government and have been doing so for 30 years.

            Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

            by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:48:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  and who's going to hear that message? (0+ / 0-)

              the media will allow out only the trickle of testimony that suits their propaganda.  The Democratic message, no matter how truthful or forceful, will not fall on the ears of any voters that matter.

              •  Well nobody's going to hear it if no Democrats say (3+ / 0-)

                it. Nobody has said it over the past 30 years, and it's been patently obvious, and stated, nakedly, in public that the goal is to starve the beast. All Democratic political junkies know it, but the voter doesn't.

                These guys have had a 30 year free pass on sabotaging America. Democrats have said nothing about this.

                The media will cover it, and if they don't they can send it to my inbox or people can hear it from their Democratic friends who will follow suit and repeat the meme.

                There has to be a coherent message that can cut through the din and that has visceral meaning. There has been none.

                I do not believe that a concerted effort to push that message would not be able to resonate due to a lack of corporate media support.

                The only reason that meme isn't well understood and in play is because Democrats have not tried.

                Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 01:12:00 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  And the best thing about it is that Conservatives (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                OleHippieChick, bobcat41702

                will own up to it.

                "Yea, we want to sabotage Obamacare! Death panels and stuff!"

                I've been pushing the sabotage meme since 2010. Wouldn't it have been nice to have that around in 2011, with the Teabaggers, 2012 with the election, 2013 with the Debt ceiling.

                The Ryan Budget, unemployment, ACA implementation, Scotty Walker - and on and on. All Republicans have is sabotage, and they will admit to it if pressed - their more animated constituents would demand it.

                peace~

                Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 01:15:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Except Hillary is not currently a candidate (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Crashing Vor, caul

          So apples and kumquats here.

          Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

          by anastasia p on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:00:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yep (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        k9disc

        and that go silent for August was brilliant too.

  •  That's right! (15+ / 0-)

    If they make any notice of this crap at all, it should be to point out what a waste of time and money it is, how the Republicans' constituents are being underserved by their reps.
    Otherwise, boycott.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:16:47 AM PDT

    •  Yes and (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SanFernandoValleyMom, snwflk

      if the GOP turn off mikes, or don't let them speak, or otherwise act like bullies, it's on the record and can be used in ads this fall.

      For that reason alone, they should participate.

      At least as much as the GOP will let them. Which won't be much.

      •  And if Democrats did run ads based on those snubs (6+ / 0-)

        ...what would be the context conveyed to voters?  Benghazi.  Yet another "investigation" of Benghazi.

        So how exactly does it help Democrats at all to willingly participate in yet another witch hunt over Benghazi?  Every time the word gets mentioned, it distracts just a little bit more from every other issue - including issues that are crucial for Democrats to emphasize.

        Once again, Democrats would be allowing Republicans to set the agenda.  How would it help Democrats to publicize every little snub and snark they receive from Rethugs during committee hearings?  Just so they can look like losers in the eyes of the American people?

        No thanks...

        All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

        by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:11:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I'm pretty sure Hillary will be just fine. (40+ / 0-)

    Gee, Hillary Clinton, being the subject of irresponsible attacks and insane conspiracy theories.

    I wonder if she can hack it? Lol

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:19:10 AM PDT

  •  Sorry (22+ / 0-)

    I'm beginning to think that there is something to this Benghazi controversy after all. If there wasn't, why would these prominent Democrats be sitting on the committee? They would just ignore it if the accusations had no merit.

    "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

    by bink on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:19:53 AM PDT

    •  Exactly. Whats worse is that (18+ / 0-)

      people will end up thinking that not because its true, but because some social climbing Dems want to kiss up to Hillary Clinton who hasnt even been elected.

      •  The irony (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        caul, OleHippieChick, claude

        is that Hillary is surely smart enough for this stunt to have the opposite effect on her.  I.e., it's not going to put them in her good graces but just the opposite because they're ultimately going to make it that much harder for her in 2016 and for the party in 2014.

        She ought to go and have a chat with them and let them know how she feels about their wanting to give this witch hunt legitimacy with the imprimatur of "bipartisanship."

        Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

        by democracy inaction on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:57:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You are ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room (15+ / 0-)

        which is the national MEDIA. I couldn't careless if Democrats decided to use this time and go bird watching, but individuals such as Elijah Cummings realize that the media will stitch an unanswered rebuke of the administration and of Secretary Clinton onto a loop and play it with incessant zeal.

        This charade will not influence the votes of Republicans who are already committed to vote against  Democrats during the midterms with great conviction, but it could have some sway with independent voters who might be convinced by the media's continued playing of this condemnation of Clinton, the administration, and Democrats.

        The media will always play a role in this and Democrats have a sound reason, as much as they want to ignore the kangaroo court, for wanting to be there. It is not as clear cut as you want to make it....

        •  ill bet you money on the best day of the hearing, (8+ / 0-)

          it gets less eyeballs than a rerun of Sponge Bob.

        •  You all need to learn from the Obama Campaign. (15+ / 0-)

          Remember 'you didnt build that' Boy did the GOP throw a hissy fit. Based the entire first day of their convention over it. And what did it get them? A few meaningless cycles and no votes they didnt already have. Did the Obama Campaign mount a major counter offensive with their own day of refuting it? No. Just stuck to executing thier plan on their terms. Thats how you win.

          Dont shit yournpants over the media. They are in it for the hype, which will soon evaporate for lack of public interest.  Instead, we need to stay focused on things Democrats care about. Which aint Bullghazi.

          •  Do you believe the public will know that Dems sat (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            artmartin

            out this hearing because they thought it was ridiculous?

            They won't have a clue. All they will see are Republicans accusing Hillary Clinton of "failing" the 4 dead Americans. Heck, some voters wouldn't even be able to identify a Democrat if they saw them on teevee.... All they will see is some guy rebuking the Secretary of State for failing the nation.

            As for the "we didn't build that" nonsense. The media played that wall to wall. The President won because he had a more compelling case in the end and he was able to turn out his base.

            That "we didn't build that" is still part of the Republican meme hall of fame.

        •  "the media will stitch an unanswered rebuke"... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          caul, Mystic Michael, Penny GC, HCKAD

          "onto a loop and play it with incessant zeal."

          Aren't they going to do that regardless of whether Democrats participate or not?  How much time will they give Democrats in rebuttal anyway?  They'll give the Secretary plenty of camera time (after all, it's mostly about her), but the Democrats in attendance will be pretty much ignored, just as they are now.  

          The media has a vested interest as well as the publicans in this being a bipartisan affair.  It won't hold much credibility in the public unless a few Democrats are involved. It'll be just another publican witch-hunt or worse, a publican campaign commercial. That might play on fox "news" or in snippets on the other cablenets, but by making it bipartisan, the Democrats are moving it from marginalization on fox "news" into the world of non stop coverage on all the cablenets, just for the ratings.

          They should have stayed out of the publican campaign commercial instead of legitimizing it.

          A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

          by dougymi on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:01:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The media will cover it either way. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          caul, Penny GC, claude

          But they will give far more credence to the hearings if the Democrats participate...and considerably less credence if the Democrats boycott.

          Every word or action given to the committee by a Democrat just "legitimzes" it that much more.  Participating - in any way - is simply a no-win scenario for Democrats.  The only way for them to win is to refuse to play the game at all.

          All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

          by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:21:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  A refrain and chorus of "Sabotage" should do (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Penny GC, OleHippieChick, snwflk

          nicely for making this story go away or at least cause some pain and anguish for these hypocritical, opportunistic saboteurs.

          Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

          by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:53:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Of course there is (9+ / 0-)

      Count on some Democrats giving life to this zombie lie by trying to be "fair and balanced" to appeal to mythical swing voters back home.  All Republicans need are one or two, and they'll have a "bipartisan inquiry!"

      We have always been at war with al Qaeda.

      by Dallasdoc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:02:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, unless there's been an announcement (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      caul, Penny GC, snwflk

      from the Minority Leader that I haven't seen yet, no one is sitting on this damn Kangaroo Kommittee yet.  And if you thing the GOP actually has anything other than politics going on this you must have been drinking water fouled by Fox.

      Proud to be a Democrat

      by Lying eyes on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:18:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The problem I have with this committee (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      caul, Simplify

      is that the basic problem--what were we doing in Libya to begin with--will not be addressed by anyone, dems or repubs, simply because our intervention was, mostly, bipartisan.

      That intervention is why our ambassador was killed.  Anything else is just a sideshow, yet no one of either party will address that simple question.

      It was the policy itself, not the management of that policy, that to me is the real issue.

    •  "These charges are too absurd to rebut" (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Simplify, gramofsam1

      Somebody ask John Kerry how well that worked for him.

      I'll tell you right out, I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk. - Kasper Gutman

      by rasbobbo on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:52:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well there's 17 names reccing (0+ / 0-)

      this BS that are definitely on my list of people who's opinions matter not one speck.

  •  Benghazi follies (22+ / 0-)

    amazing.  Is this really all they got?  

    With all the issues swirling around in our national discourse, the GOP is latching onto the thinnest of reeds imaginable.  

    Agree strongly with Crashing Vor's comment, ignoring them is the very best thing Dems could do.  Participating in the committee feels vaguely like the scientists who agree to debate creationists... it legitimizes something that is best ignored.

    Leave the Benghazi attention machine to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, who can handle it just fine.

    The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. - Albert Einstein

    by ERdoc in PA on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:21:47 AM PDT

    •  The silver lining is this (4+ / 0-)
      With all the issues swirling around in our national discourse, the GOP is latching onto the thinnest of reeds imaginable.
      This is the best they can do, a fake non-scandal, they've got nothing else.  Now if we could just convince these idiot Dems not to give them this either as they are poising themselves to do...

      Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

      by democracy inaction on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:01:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Benghazi© is all they have, Dems take heed (0+ / 0-)

      They will focus entirely on this. Dems can't ignore it, but should use it to discuss the future. What can we do in the future to prevent it? And not just Benghazi©, how about 9/11? How about the Kenya embassy attack? And speaking of the future, what can we do about jobs?

      "A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open." - Frank Zappa

      by macleme on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:42:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Repubs are trying to Swiftboat her. (18+ / 0-)

    Not fighting the lies didn't work so well in 2004.

    I honestly don't know if ignoring it or fighting it is the right strategy. But I understand the Dems' motivations.

    Heck, maybe they can throw some references about Reagan killing 200+ marines and all the embassy attacks under Bush into the media.

  •  If one Democrat is part of this committee, (17+ / 0-)

    it will give the committee some credence.

    If Dems participate, boy will they be fucking stupid.

    Taking a line from a TV show and paraphrasing, let the republicans go on their witch hunt -- The Democrats will be fighting for... well, whatever they're supposed to be fighting for.  Last I heard, it was raising the minimum wage to $15.00.  

    Oh, wait, not $15.00, but $10.00.

    Dallasdoc: "Snowden is the natural successor to Osama bin Laden as the most consequential person in the world, as his actions have the potential to undo those taken in response to Osama."

    by gooderservice on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:26:13 AM PDT

  •  Do people really think (16+ / 0-)

    the media is going to discredit this investigation if Democrats don't take part?

    The media gives credibility to whatever gets clicks or viewers, regardless of who takes part.

    I think there's a very legitimate argument for taking part and lending their voices to the discussion and defend publicly the argument that this is a sham.

    Otherwise, you risk another swift boating where Democrats chose to ignore something they thought wouldn't hurt them only to get blindsided.

    •  Sort of triple bank shot logic... (15+ / 0-)

      1. This investigation is a waste of time, thats why im here.

      2. This committee is a joke, thats why im serving on it.

      3. The American people should ignore this committee's findings, thats why I am here voting for them.

      •  Are you applying that Americans are logical? (10+ / 0-)

        See, that's your first problem.

        I think it's a coin toss whether or not the public will continue to think this is a non story, or whether a few days or weeks for slow news days will turn this into THE story of 2014.

        Democrats risk getting blindsided if they do...again. I'm old enough to remember people arguing we should ignore the swift boat ads or ignore the tea party, because Americans won't care and suddenly they did.

        I always hear how Democrats needs to use the bully pulpit and fight loud and proud and publicly. But now they're being told to be quiet and ignore it. That's not logical at all.

        •  No, I understand how elections work. (18+ / 0-)

          You guys have to stop shitting your pants anytime the GOP gets their lie machine cranking. John Kerry lost because he was not strong enough to unseat an incumbent. We lost in 2004 by not turning out our vote, not because of swift boat. Anyone who beleived that was never going to vote for us anyway.

          This is a base election, as are all of them. If we win, we must motivate our base. Our base does not give a shit about Benghazi.  At all. So if old white conservative rural people want to vote on that, fuck em. We will never win them anyway.

          There is no group of voters out there 'up in the air' on Benghazi,  okay? If you care about it, youll never vote Democrat. There is no point in wasting any time on a GOP base issue.

          Next youll be telling me Dems need to speak out against Vince Foster's murder.

          •  Sigh (3+ / 0-)
            You guys have to stop shitting your pants anytime the GOP gets their lie machine cranking.
            Because ignoring them has worked so well in the past.
            Our base does not give a shit about Benghazi.
            With all due respect, our base doesn't seem to give a shit about anything.
          •  And this isn't only about the election (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jrooth, DiesIrae, TheLizardKing

            you're looking at this through the lens of the midterms. We're going to lose the midterms regardless of what we do because Democratic base voters simply do not vote and will not vote.

            I'm looking about this through the broader spectrum of what the American people see. Once Hillary gets dragged in front of this committee, it's going to eat up the news. No one is going to hear about minimum wage hikes or health care working or the economy getting better. They're going to hear Hillary and Republicans.

            I think there is a good argument to letting her fight them alone, because she can, but I think it's stupid of Democrats to believe that just because they're not there, people aren't going to listen and it's not going to eat up the attention of the public we're trying to push our agenda to.

            •  Hillary has already testified on Benghazi (5+ / 0-)
              think it's stupid of Democrats to believe that just because they're not there, people aren't going to listen and it's not going to eat up the attention of the public we're trying to push our agenda to.
              That's not the argument BBB is making. The press is going to cover this because the hint of scandal is far more important (and easier to cover) than actual news.

              The point is that having Democrats on the investigation wont help so why participate? HRC doesn't need backup to handle this dog-and-pony show (or if she does need backup then she's not the candidate we think she is).

              Personally, I think it doesn't matter. If Democrats want to get on TV as much as possible (and they do) then they can go on this committee and have their mics cut off and their witnesses ignored and be told they're out of order to their hearts' content.

              •  I think they simply want to get footage (6+ / 0-)

                of every one of them answering her
                "What difference does it make?" snippet with their own thundering and self-righteous response "I'll TELL you what difference it makes!" that they can then use in their own re-election campaigns.

                I have a suggestion for Hillary. When they ask her to explain that particular response, as they will, I think she should say:

                "I meant that the deaths had occurred and no amount of after the-fact second guessing was going to bring those four brave people back. Just as no amount of after the fact second guessing about the August 6th 2001 Bush Daily Brief was going to bring back the 3,000 innocent lives that perished on September 11th 2001".

                That's actually the truth in both cases. Shoulda coulda woulda doesn't alter the past. And if they want to hold Clinton culpable for ignoring a security threat ( I think that's their raison d'etre) why not hold culpable those who ignored a far larger threat that actually occurred within our own borders and took multiples more victims and which then escalated into   actions against the wrong entities for the wrong reasons that cost hundreds of thousands of MORE lives?

                If the Democrats really want to rain on the Republican's parade, they should suggest that they are expanding the scope of the investigation back to the Bush administration.

                 

                “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:50:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  I don't think we're going to lose (3+ / 0-)

              And I think people are going to be very surprised.

              People are PISSED. They're mad. And they're not mad at the Dems.

              Look at what's happening when reps go home. They get confronted by people wanting to know why they're not raising the min wage. They want to know why they're not fixing infrastructure, why they're not doing something about jobs, why they're wasting time trying to get rid of Obamacare, which people are finding isn't so bad after all.

              IOW, people are figuring out they were lied to, and the GOP doesn't give 2 shits about them.

              This just reinforces that. Nobody gives a damn about Benghazi. The dems need to be on that committee to bring that up every meeting.

              •  People are pissed (0+ / 0-)

                yes, I see that too, but whether or not it matters depends on a number of factors.

                A.) the House is gerrymandered in such a way that those pissed people don't represent enough votes to win 218 seats
                B.) those pissed people don't live in states where Senate elections are being held this year.

                I think we will find Democrats kicking Republican ass in Governor's races...and no where else, because those races are the fairest representation of the electorate at large this year.

            •  If we lose, it wont be over this bullshit. (7+ / 0-)

              But why waste time and energy on it?

              This is like if the 9/11 truthers forced Dems to accuse President Bush of engineering 9/11. You think they would waste a campaign over weathor not Bush was responsible for 9/11? Theyre not that stupid.

              •  Because the country is already (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                artmartin, snwflk, gramofsam1

                wasting time and energy on it.

                Pretending it's not happening is not a smart move, IMO

                I don't disagree that taking part gives credibility, but I don't agree that it doesn't already have credibility.

                Whether or not this committee investigation has credibility is not going to depend on whether or not Democrats take part.

              •  the Bengazi truthers already (0+ / 0-)

                have the Republicans accusing Clinton and Obama, and by association all the Democratic candidates as part of a cover up. Bad analogy.

                But anyway, if the House leadership won't allow Democrats to call witnesses or view documentation then it'd be a no brainer to not join the committee.

            •  I find your lack of faith...disturbing, DROzone. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rubyclaire

              When someone - supposedly on OUR side - states "We're going to lose the midterms regardless of what we do...", all I can think is: 'Gee, thanks for the pep talk.  Now I feel REALLY motivated.'

              It's a classic example of the Nervous Nellie fatalism that has doomed us - time and again.  Not that we're necessarily outgunned and overwhelmed by the Right.  Rather that too many of us allow ourselves to get frightened and intimidated by Rethug power tactics - enough so that we shoot ourselves in the foot.  The Rethugs shout "Boo!"...and we wet our pants.  Then they laugh at us.

              Don't do that .  You're not helping.

              All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

              by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:41:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's not Republican power tactics (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Kickemout

                it's electoral reality. Republicans aren't wining because they're better, they're winning because they fucking show up to vote.

                •  It is in fact a Republican power tactic... (3+ / 0-)

                  ...to try to con Democrats into thinking that they have to participate in this Kangaroo Kommittee in order to defend themselves and their positions.  You don't score points on defense - and you don't win elections on defense.

                  Agreeing to do battle with Rethugs on their rhetorical & ideological "turf" would be to cede a position of relative strength for a position of relative weakness.  It would be falling right into the Rethuglican trap.

                  We shouldn't do that.

                  All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

                  by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:35:40 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  So how is this (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Free Jazz at High Noon

                  freaking non stop surreal Benghazi investigation going to GOTV for the Dems? It's like groundhog day wherein we have to keep rehashing the political battles that doesn't mean shit to ordinary voters, over and over.  Every time the Democrat's become reactionary and play to this kind of dirty political kabuki it reminds people how dysfunctional and bogus our political process has become. It's a symptom of just how insane DC has become.

                  Takes two to tango in the 'vast right wing conspiracy' so why feed the beast? I find it especially absurd as Hillary is such a hawk and tries hard to out tough the best of the Repubs. as far as 'foreign policy' goes. Most people are weary of these dirty murky wars that are endless and have put this country in perpetual security lock down. Not to mention that we here in der Homeland are losing not only our rights but our livelihoods or any semblance of a democratic system or social and economic.

                  Why give these asshole  R's obstructionists what they want another false security threat that seems to be just another screw up in the neocon geopolitical game that has already cost 'we the people' so much. Seems worrying to me that our candidate has already been anointed two years before the primary and is already going to go to battle with the lunatic Repugs to fight the same old fight we've spent decades on. Send me! again and again. This will not inspire Democratic voters who turned out en mass to vote for needed bottom up change they could believe in. Quit giving these RW hardliner blowhards equivalency.                    

                  •  It's not (0+ / 0-)

                    but Democrats don't get to decide that. They can cry and whine all they want about their principals and issues and what not, but the people are going to hear what they see on the television, see on their home pages, see in their newspapers.

                    If that's Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi, then it's not going to matter what Democrats do or don't do.

          •  John Kerry lost because he wanted it both ways (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Kickemout

            He wanted to be the anti-war candidate and run as a soldier.  Americans don't like conflicted messages.

            But now, in the days of chickenhawks, this will be no problem for Hillary.  She can be as pro-war as she likes because nobody in her family is going to serve in one.  Nope, not going to be any conflicted messaging coming from her.

            The hearings will just give her another opportunity to double down on how tough she's going to be in office.

          •  I agree, but you have to acknowledge it, and (0+ / 0-)

            it must be dismissed.

            "This is just another Republican attempt to Sabotage American to serve their perverted ideology and their corporate sponsors."

            If I were to be on that committee, I would keep a steady stream of sabotage language, framing, and questioning, to point a finger at these fools and call them out on their desire to destroy government.

            "Have you signed Grover Norquist's letter? Do you want to see government drowned in a bathtub? Isn't this just the latest monkey wrench in a long line, 30 years, of Republican sabotage?"

            Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

            by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:01:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Democrats have the success of the ACA to brag (0+ / 0-)

          about. We control the senate and can hold hearings to highlight what worked and to talk in public about how to fix what didn't in a constructive format.

          Democrats can point out thet repugs are denying healthcare to people. Not insurance companies, but repuglians.

          HIlliary and Susan will counterpunch Gowdy and Gohmert into hamburger.

          Democrats don't need to fight the pugs on their turf and by their rules.

          We can only play defense in the House but we can go on the offensive in the Senate.

    •  No, you don't (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TomFromNJ, artmartin

      You can't swiftboat a non-candidate. Doesn't anyone here realize you are talking about someone who isn't even in the game, and we need to be talking about who is running  NOW? For THIS November?

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

      by anastasia p on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:01:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Good advice (9+ / 0-)
    Guys...leave them to their witch hunt. Dont give it any form of legitimacy. Why dont you guys, instead, get out in the country and talk things that Democratic voters give a shit about and stop tripping over your shoelaces to kiss up to Hillary Clinton. She's perfectly capable of handling these chumps all on her own.
    but I don't think theyre going to take it

    Happy just to be alive

    by exlrrp on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:38:23 AM PDT

  •  Democrats should appoint (33+ / 0-)

    Alan Grayson.

    That's it.

    He could have all the time usually reserved for the 7 Democrats and let him loose to berate and ridicule the GOP all the time.

    Hillary can handle her own damn self in front of this banana court.  She doesn't need Dems legitimizing this bullshit by being part of it in some vague notion of protecting her.  

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:39:26 AM PDT

  •  One of the problems is that the media is totally (7+ / 0-)

    in the tank for the Republicans, and no matter what happens, The Benghazi will be the story, and the media will try every which way to parrot the talking points.

    They would so love something that they will ignore everything else--even the huge amount of #Fail this thing is.

    That said, whoever is advising the Democrats politically is on a serious next level of stupid.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:39:41 AM PDT

    •  I'm beginning to thing the Dems (12+ / 0-)

      are going to blow the midterm.  they're really fucking stupid and NOT at all media savvy.  The fact that the GOP is running away from Obamacare should be a green light to bash them over the head with their 50+ bullshit votes and the fact that they have nothing to offer but nihilism.  Dems should be pushing forward with what they should do next on healthcare, strengthening Medicare and SS.  They should be pushing for more help to those in need, jobless and so on and differentiate between them and the Do Nothing GOP who would rather be engaging in partisan bullshit like shutting the govt down or going on these BS witch hunts.

      Instead the stupid fucks are debating whether or not to legitimize the BS witch hunts and in the process are getting sucked into this BS debate that should be ridiculed at all opportunity.   Benghazi?  Bencrazy!!!  Most republicans probably couldn't even fucking find Benghazi on a map and  I hope they appoint Alan Grayson top this BS panel so he can repeat that ad nauseum.    

      This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

      by DisNoir36 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:46:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  How can they blow an election (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DiesIrae, The Hindsight Times, k9disc

        they were never winning?

        The fact that the GOP is running away from Obamacare should be a green light to bash them over the head with their 50+ bullshit votes and the fact that they have nothing to offer but nihilism.  Dems should be pushing forward with what they should do next on healthcare, strengthening Medicare and SS.  They should be pushing for more help to those in need, jobless and so on and differentiate between them and the Do Nothing GOP who would rather be engaging in partisan bullshit like shutting the govt down or going on these BS witch hunts.
        They've been doing this, you know why no one is hearing about it?

        Because all that's being reported is Benghazi and the damn Malaysian plane.

        •  If they've been doing it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          k9disc, Brooke In Seattle, claude

          it's been weak sauce.  The fact that an airplane that's been missing for a month gets more play in the news than Dems shows that they're not even trying.  Get outrageous.  Alan Grayson had it rights when he said the GOP healthcare plan was "don't get sick and if you do get sick die quickly!"  THAT'S how you get air play.  Get outrageous get angry.  Frank Pallone calling the GOP a monkey court.  Someone telling Louie Gohmert to shove a bunch of asparagus in his mouth and stop with his aspersions.  Someone telling Steve King to have a cantalope and STFU.  

          This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

          by DisNoir36 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:31:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Huh? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            artmartin, snwflk
            Alan Grayson had it rights when he said the GOP healthcare plan was "don't get sick and if you do get sick die quickly!"  
            And that got attention for what? like 10 minutes?

            You say the fact the airplane gets more play means that Dems aren't trying, but then come up with an example of what they should do that itself barely made the news beyond blogs.

            •  Has it been said again? Did anyone else say it? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sillia

              It is the Democratic leadership and party faithful who have short attention spans.

              Democrats are defined by the Republicans -

              "What will Republicans do/say?"
              "We are not as bad as Republicans."
              "See, we are strong on Defense."

              Everything is tactical, nothing is strategic.

              You can have the ACA or "don't get sick and if you do get sick die quickly!"

              "Apparently the Governors of the non ACA states just want their citizens to die quickly."

              That is fire, but fire has to be fed. Zero repetition or message from Democrats except for "Republicans are Bad" and "We're better than Republicans".

              The fact that we keep dusting off or propping up failed conservative policies doesn't do much to allow Democrats to stand on their own.

              Here's to that changing real soon!

              Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

              by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:13:47 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  That's simply not true (0+ / 0-)

          Democrats haven't been nearly as aggressive as they should be in running on the ACA.  They haven't been pushing their advantage on issues nearly as much as they could - or should.  So there's plenty of potential there yet to develop and use.

          Any military tactician knows that the army that determines the battleground - the territory on which the conflict will be waged - has a powerful automatic advantage, that often translates to a win.  For Democrats to agree to join that Benghazi committee is equivalent to agreeing to fight Republicans on their own turf - which would be even worse than a military battle, as the Benghazi pseudo-issue offers ZERO opportunity for a Democrat win.

          It's a sucker's game.  Rethugs are laying a trap.  For Democrats to get sucked into it would be to relinquish a position of relative strength, for one of guaranteed weakness.

          All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

          by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:57:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What? (0+ / 0-)
            Democrats haven't been nearly as aggressive as they should be in running on the ACA.
            And in the meantime, I've seen entry after entry here about how Kay Hagan and Mary Landrieu and other Dems are killing it on ACA.

            Make up your minds.

      •  Remember the government shutdown (0+ / 0-)

        and near-default? Apparently the Democratic Party leadership doesn't.

        Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

        by Simplify on Fri May 09, 2014 at 11:22:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This seems to be a contradictory argument (6+ / 0-)

      if the media is going to cover it and make it a story, why should Democrats ignore it?

      Cut to six months from now where DailyKos is bashing Dems for ignoring the Beghanzi shitstorm.

      •  I agree with all your posts, DROzone (6+ / 0-)

        For what that's worth.  :-)

        Ignoring this might feel good but again -- this Beltway press is NOT on our side and will NOT say, "See? Dems ignored this; it's obviously nonsense.'

        They WILL "report", with complete fecklessness and gullibility, on how HRC got "grilled."

        I come down on the side of having some representation on the committee, calling bullshit at every opportunity.

        •  I think the suggestion above (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Penny GC, delver

          that Dems appoint ONE member for the committee, preferably Alan Grayson, LOL, would solve this problem nicely. To the camera and the uninvolved viewer, it would look very unfair and one-sided. The point could be made that the GOP is wasting the taxpayers' money on a witchhunt. Whereas, with NO Dems in the room, they will be free to paint it however they want to--example: Dems have something to hide and only we GPO'ers are brave enough to ferret this out,  etc, etc, etc. Dems would possibly get more airtime with one raving member  than with none.

          Just my 2 centavos, I really don't know what's best. If Hilary will be the candidate, maybe she should be setting the strategy, behind the scenes. First test of whether she can play an Obama-style long game?

          Where in the Constitution does it say: "...on behalf of corporate interests" ???

          by sillia on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:29:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  We've already won this pseudo-issue... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          claude

          So continuing to fight when we've already won only gives Rethuglicans a chance to get back in the game - or to appear to do so.  It would only serve to perpetuate the illusion that there's actually something left to debate and to resolve - when there is not.

          At a certain point, sooner or later, Democrats need to declare victory, walk away, and just leave it alone.

          Don't ya get it?  Republicans are The Black Knight!

          The Black Knight

          All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

          by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:46:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You don't win an issue (0+ / 0-)

            until it's dead. That's why Republicans are doing this, to keep it alive.

            you keep fighting till it's dead.

            •  And who gets to decide when it's dead? (0+ / 0-)

              The Republicans?  Why?  Where is it written that Republicans get to set the agenda, and Democrats are obliged to respond to it?

              By that reasoning, Republicans could conjure up just about any phoney, bogus load of bullshit - and Democrats would have no choice but to participate in the freak show.  Republicans would be spinning one tall tale after another, as fast as they could - just in order to keep Democrats on the defensive, dancing on the GOP's strings - so Democrats could never muster enough focus and momentum to implement their own agenda.

              It's insane.

              You're right:  Republicans are trying to "keep it alive" (more like resurrect it from the dead).  So why help them out by pretending that it's all real?  Just so they then can beat us over the head with it?

              It makes no sense...

              All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

              by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:09:52 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, the GOP (0+ / 0-)
                The Republicans?  Why?
                They control the House of Representatives and have subpoena power, the very argument many made to those "I won't vote dammit, Democrats suck!" people back in 2010.

                Alternatively, the media can decide its dead when they decide not to cover the story, but that's not happening either.

                By that reasoning, Republicans could conjure up just about any phoney, bogus load of bullshit - and Democrats would have no choice but to participate in the freak show. Republicans would be spinning one tall tale after another, as fast as they could - just in order to keep Democrats on the defensive, dancing on the GOP's strings - so Democrats could never muster enough focus and momentum to implement their own agenda.
                Elections have consequences.
    •  Yea, one of the main beneficiaries of the 30 years (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snwflk

      of the Republican sabotage of America has been the corporate media.

      They have the freedom to lie, the freedom to monopolize, and the freedom to sponsor political campaigns and legislation.

      I'd say the Republicans have been in the tank for the corporate media for the last 30 years.

      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

      by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:05:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why are congressional Republicans (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Marti, whl, mmacdDE, TomFromNJ, artmartin

    investigating Ben Gazzara?

    I know some of his films were a bit 'iffy', but still.

    I don't understand all the fuss.

    Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle by God's grace in England as shall never be put out.

    by Bollox Ref on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:42:15 AM PDT

  •  I'd show up for the opening day, wait until the (11+ / 0-)

    cameras are live and the thing is gaveled in, then say "Oh, excuse us, we thought this was the 'Replace Obamacare with Single-Payer' hearing" then walk out.

    Ain't no such things as halfway crooks.

    by here4tehbeer on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:42:26 AM PDT

  •  This committee is going to happen... (19+ / 0-)

    ...whether we like it or not.  So we need to put Democrats on it who are not pussies.  People like Alan Grayson, Keith Ellison, Tammy Duckworth, Jan Schakowsky, Barbara Lee, et. al.  It's our only chance to ensure this blows up in the faces of Republican'ts, just has the hearing with Health Insurance industry executives did...

  •  I'm watching them blow it on populism (7+ / 0-)

    Not only the next vote but  the next generation.

  •  I agree with Rep. DeLauro's suggestion... (9+ / 0-)

    that the Dems appoint one member to the Committee. For shits and giggles, and because his very presence would be a gadfly for the metanarratives of the Committee's conspiracy theorizing, I suggest Keith Ellison.

    Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

    by angry marmot on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:49:46 AM PDT

  •  It's an invitation to a pie fight on a national (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whl

    scale, of course Democrats want in on it. It's what we do best.

    "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." Edward R. Murrow

    by temptxan on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:51:34 AM PDT

  •  i agree, this is a no-brainer. Stay away! (0+ / 0-)
  •  If the Democrats could get their (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rexxnyc, Brooke In Seattle

    shit together and fight for the issues instead of playing the fool for the Republicans we'd have a decent future.

    Fight for jobs by building infrastructure and improving education opportunities. Keep businesses and their fucking money in the States.

    Fight for equality.

    We have so many things to fight for.

    Instead we are having a pissing contest with people who are into slinging their shit around.

    This better be good. Because it is not going away.

    by DerAmi on Fri May 09, 2014 at 05:59:33 AM PDT

  •  So Kerry was right to ignore Swiftboaters? (8+ / 0-)

    How'd that work out for him? Oh, right, this is like TOTALLY different!

    "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

    by kovie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:01:00 AM PDT

    •  Agreed. Kerry got killed ... (6+ / 0-)

      And I remember thinking, "Who the hell will swallow this bullshit?  Why even dignify with a response?"

      I was WAY wrong.

      And let's never forget the media's role in catapulting the crap, for months on end.

      •  A president who won't raise his hands to defend (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joe Bacon

        himself when his defining characteristic was the courage he showed during Vietnam to buck the meatgrinder?

        When a large percentage of the population, his party, was pro-peace and tired of lies and fearmongering?

        I'm shocked that people didn't rally to his side.

        Democratic leadership are idiots. I mean very, very stupid. It is a shame that so many people follow their lead.

        "The Party of NO" - that's the best they came up with in the last 10 years. How long did that one stick? A week?

        Meanwhile Republicans have been sabotaging america with the help of their corporate sponsors and the corporate sponsored supreme court, they've got government in the bathtub and are getting on to the drowning part.

        This narrative is not only believable, it's true, demonstrably true. That is the response that should be taken.

        Republicans are saboteurs  are trying to wreck America and turn it into some 3rd world Robber Baron colony.

        Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

        by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:24:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That would be an valid argument if ... (0+ / 0-)

      this had anything to do with an actual candidate who is actually running. But only the candidate — and not speculative supporters — can respond to swiftboating. Unless Hillary plans to declare in the immediate future, this is all a moot argument. We cannot respond for a non-candidate.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

      by anastasia p on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:03:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ridiculous (0+ / 0-)

        Sure, the ultimate target is Hillary, but the whole party, and specifically Obama officials, are being attacked here. Unless and until she declares, they have to defend themselves to avoid her being tarnished once she declares.

        This is part of why we lose, but "rising above the muck and mire". Well, sorry, but politics is mostly much and mire, because the lowest elements make it so.

        "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

        by kovie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 09:00:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Kerry wallked right into it with his Tin Soldier (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Penny GC

      Act at the convention.  He wasn't authentic.  People expected him to be the anti-war candidate but as usual the centrist establishment had to repackage him as something right of center and he came off as phony and conflicted.

      The Democratic establishment did to him what they did to Al Gore.  

    •  Apples and oranges... (0+ / 0-)

      Kerry should have quickly and aggressively addressed that bullshit and moved on.  Probably would not have been the difference in winning however against an incumbent.  It was a series of political attack ads that could have been easily be rebuffed and turned around. This is a circus that will go on for many months because the GOP failed to get the necessary traction on obamacare.  They are admitting to failure and turning to the next tired failed argument on their list. This is not a new charge. A previous version of this circus that went on for two years failed to gain any traction.  This is the time to go on a larger offensive on all the issues that matter to voters.  There is already fatigue concerning benghazi among anybody who would even consider voting for a democrat.  Any effort spent on this by the democrats gives an illusion that there might be something there and distracts from the real issues.  Hillary will destroy them and it will look like the political hack job that it is.

      •  Relying on Repubs to overreach and self-destruct (0+ / 0-)

        and for the public to tire of them and see through their bullshit is a HORRIBLE strategy, even though sometimes it does work--briefly. Voters respect people who defend themselves from attack. They do not respect people who "rise above it all" like superior Brahmins. (Yes that was a dig at Kerry.)

        Ironically, the two biggest targets of GOP smear attacks over being weak and disloyal in defending US troops and interests are our former and current SoSs.

        "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

        by kovie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 09:03:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Democrats Should Put Their Republican Members (0+ / 0-)

    on the committee.  They should have one real democrat on the committee to report back to Nancy Pelosi.  The republican democrats can act all tea baggery and the real democrat can counter the lies and call bull crap on the conspiracy theories.

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:04:43 AM PDT

  •  Well, I'm not so sure the GOP could care less (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whl, mmacdDE

    Because I see little evidence they really care much at all about those four dead Americans. Hate to say it, but I think it's almost entirely political for them. I think they could NOT care any less about actually analyzing what went wrong in Benghazi and reducing the likelihood such a tragedy could happen again.

    Nevertheless. There are competing arguments about the pros and cons of Democratic participation in the exercise. Armchair quarterback declarations about how stupid they all are -- and how they're going to blow the election -- are just tiresome. But, alas, maybe it's simply not possible to make the rec list with thoughtful, respectful analyses?

  •  Obamacare (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PsychoSavannah

    This is what dems need to focus on.  Every time  they mention Benghazi dems should answer with obamacare.  While the GOP is holding their witch hunt dems should be holding obamacare rallies across the country.  Dems need to learn how to drive a message and stop reacting to GOP nonsense which is exactly what they want.
    The GOP would love for dems to get caught up in their nonsense.  Dems should just say no fing way.  
    If the corporate media wants to pay attention to the GOP let them.  They do it any ways.  Let dems speak to the public.  And when people wonder why dems are not at the hearing they get to find out because dems are working hard to help their fellow Americans.  What do you think is more important to the average American, health care or Benghazi?  If they don't have an option to pick from they will listen to those who are talking.  
    So let the village idiots have their podium. But at the same time snow America there are better topics to be discusses that actually matter.  
    Dems are not going to win by debating about nonsense.  It's time to stop playing children's games and show the world how real citizens should behave.

  •  Democrats are so stupid it hurts (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10

    You are right, what the hell is the point of setting at the table with this bunch of blowhards, unless, you are just one of the same gang.

  •  OTOH (11+ / 0-)

    could backfire badly on the GOP. The facts are not in dispute and the criticisms of the administration are preposterous. As Atrios points out, it's hard to think what Benghazi is supposed to be about. Talking points? Al Qaeda? I don't think anyone on the GOP even understands what the basis for the criticism is supposed to be. All Benghazi has ever been is shorthand for "something bad" and then there's been a rush to attach "something bad" to Obama, no matter how tenuous the claims.

    Without Dems in the room, the BS goes entirely unchallenged. The recent revelations of the involvement of Lindsay Graham in concocting the false narrative with CBS are very damaging to the GOP. Why not try to make hay of that? With no Dems in the room, fat chance of that happening.

    This could well be a Joe McCarthy moment for the modern GOP and if no Dems are there, there won't be anyone to say "have you no sense of decency?"

    •  What Benghazi is supposed to be about (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zorp
      I don't think anyone on the GOP even understands what the basis for the criticism is supposed to be.
      It's basically this: The Administration did not admit that Benghazi happened because Obama, Hillary, and everyone else in the Administration are weak, evil, terrorist-sympathizing Muslim socialist Kenyan usurpers who hate America and have a failed foreign policy.

      In other words, Susan Rice went on TV, told the nation what happened based on what the relevant agencies knew at the time, and deliberately and maliciously failed/neglected/refused to confirm and validate every right-wing paranoid fantasy about the President, his "beliefs," and his foreign policy.

      That's essentially it. That's the "scandal."

      •  You forgot (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Penny GC, TomFromNJ

        The military didn't do anything.

        Of course, they weren't there and couldn't BE there for hours, at the very minimum, nor did they know who to fight or where, or even what the hell was going on.

        But they didn't DO anything. Though nobody has any idea what the hell they could have done.

        •  Yes, that too. (0+ / 0-)

          Neither Rice nor Obama nor Clinton nor anyone else admitted that they wanted Benghazi to happen, that they helped make it happen, that they made sure nothing was done to prevent it or to stop it, and that they didn't care about the victims.

          That's the "truth" that the Administration "refuses" to tell.

  •  Here's the thing: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whl, mmacdDE

    Hillary is going to get dragged in front of this committee, where the Republicans will do their best to smear her. The reason to have Democrats on the committee is so that they can ask her questions as well. That will give her an opportunity to rebut the GOP smears without being interrupted by the next crazy question.

    So I understand the temptation to ignore the committee, but I think fighting back, and pointing out the BS at every turn, might be a better strategy.

    (And either way, I don't see this costing us the 2014 elections...!)

  •  Might as well test Clinton now. (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whl, rexxnyc, greenbell, wa ma, CS in AZ, Penny GC

    Obviously I think she'll do well and turn the mess back on Republicans...there may be tears involved, and not hers.  But hey, if she can't handle Republicans on a committee with regard to a nonexistent scandal, she shouldn't be President.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:16:22 AM PDT

  •  Rep. Tulsi Gabbard must be on the panel (5+ / 0-)

    Along with Rep. Grayson, Gabbard could blow holes in the phony investigation. She is a combat veteran Captain in the Hawaiian Army Natl. Guard. Watching 30-second sound bites of her schooling GOoPerz would be a win-win.

    When the thugs put on a media circus, it's necessary and right that the Democrats counterpunch.

    Thus, LtCol Tammy Duckworth would be another very able member of the committee as she could obliterate the efforts of rightwingnutjobz to make phony Benghazi propaganda. Again, watching a female combat veteran slam dunk morans would make great soundbites.

    C'mon Rep. Pelosi. Do it!

    We're all just working for Pharaoh.

    by whl on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:17:55 AM PDT

  •  Tell me how well ignoring creationists (6+ / 0-)

    and global warming deniers has gone.  Their idiocy and lack of evidence surely caused them to disappear, right?

    Sort of like Kerry ignoring the Swift Boaters.  They went away and didn't cause any problems.

    If you haven't figured out the pattern, it's this:  Continue arguing.  If you aren't made a fool of, then eventually people will start wondering if you are correct, mostly people receiving money.

    This is not the US court system.  Or a laboratory.  Being on the right side of the facts doesn't win you anything without fighting for it.

    "Moon landing was real. Evolution exists. Tax cuts lose revenue. The research has shown this a thousand times. Enough already." - Austan Goolsbee

    by anonevent on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:33:41 AM PDT

  •  Senate shd have committe on vet suicides -7 a day (0+ / 0-)

    subpoena generals who warned against invading with so few troops

    subpoena Powell who warned Bush1 out of invading with 3 times as many troops as Bush2 had

    subpoena Generals who didn't have logistics

    subpoena Brenner and ask him wtf he disbanded the Iraqi Army wholesale

    etc.

  •  Turn it into an opportunity (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angry marmot, jjohnjj, Penny GC

    Here's the strategy:

    1 - Put one(1) Democrat, and only one, on the committee.  The intention would be that this individual would be the insider who can report on what's happening behind the scenes.  Otherwise, don't dignify the proceeding.

    2 - Use this opportunity to lambast Republican witch hunts from the witness stand.  "Is it true that the RNC is using this opportunity to raise campaign funds?"  "How much is it making?"  "Haven't I been asked that same question here, here, and here? [list all dates]"

    3 - Agree to participate when subpoenaed only so far as there are new questions about new material.  Republican faces will screw up when they hear, "Mr. Speaker, this information has been covered here, here, and here [list all circumstances], and I have been asked this question many times before.  Have you anything new to review with me?" for the sixty-seventh time.

    Know that $20 I owe you? Well, since money equals speech, then speech, of course, must equal money. C'mere and I'll read you the Tao Te Ching.

    by thenekkidtruth on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:39:00 AM PDT

  •  Who were the seven House Democrats (5+ / 0-)

    who voted to investigate Benghazi yesterday?  We need to take names and remember them for the future.  

    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by Radiowalla on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:40:09 AM PDT

    •  They were (9+ / 0-)

      noted thusly last evening:

      Ron Barber (AZ-02)
      John Barrow (GA-12)
      Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
      Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
      Collin Peterson (MN-07)
      Nick Rahall (WV-03)
      Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
      Now, here's a Thing--if they were GOP and voted against the Official GOP Position, would not Boehner and company punish them somehow? Pull them off committees? Threaten to withhold campaign financing and support in the next election?

      What are Democratic leaders going to do, to punish these fucking turncoats? Their districts may be "conservative", but this theater shit is not "conservative", it is batshit crazy and based on fantasy. There is no need for Democrats to be voting for FANTASIES. So, Nancy, far as I'm concerned, the ball is in your court with these craptastic traitors. If they're going to vote Republican when it matters most, then let them go register and run as Republicans. I'm sick of their shit.

      "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

      by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:01:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you! (3+ / 0-)

        I've been searching for this all morning.  I share your utter disgust.  There was NO reason whatsoever for these supposed Democrats to vote this way, but I doubt that Pelosi will take it out on them.  I am going to contact her office and ask what she intends to do.   Maybe we can exert some pressure from our own ranks if only to get it on the record that this chickens**t freelancing must stop.

        It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

        by Radiowalla on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:39:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  look, people gotta bluedog it once in a while (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gramofsam1

        Since the Republicans were going to win, a few more Democratic "no"s wouldn't have stopped it.

        These people, I hope, are positioning themselves.  They don't want their elections to center on Benghazi.

        If they vote the wrong way when it matters, then they should get punished.

        I'm just guessing, but that's how I deal with this.

        The real problem is gerrymandering.

  •  Play dress up (7+ / 0-)

    Any Democrat who shows up should wear a clown costume.

  •  Pelosi just needs to say... (0+ / 0-)

    "We said we would participate if there an even number of Republicans and Democrats" and stand on that ground...

    Fox News, The triumph of stupidity over reason.

    by laughingriver on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:43:21 AM PDT

  •  More blustery bravado than common sense (0+ / 0-)

    I certainly agree with this...

    Republicans could care less about the four Americans who died at Benghazi.
    ...but I'll assert that this Committee fundamentally has fuck-all to do with Benghazi. I suspect that the intent of this Committee is to use "BENGHAZI!!1!" as no more than an empty referent through which they can air grievances and additional conspiracy theories about the President, his policies and decision-making with respect to the Middle East and North Africa (the "Obama Doctrine"), Secretaries Clinton and Kerry, Islam and the GOP's beloved "Clash of Civilizations." The aim of this Committee is to provide a forum by which the GOP can hear testimony from pseudo-experts (WINEP et alii) and thereby legitimate the odious perspectives of Fear, Inc.

    It is foolish to anticipate that our craven media will either ignore such proceedings or call bullshit on the GOP pols, their "expert witnesses" or their conspiratorial narratives.

    Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

    by angry marmot on Fri May 09, 2014 at 06:49:37 AM PDT

  •  Just throw them a big curve (5+ / 0-)

    Have Harry Reid setup all kinds of committees in the Senate to investigate the Koch Brothers.

  •  Zombi Benghazi, RW propaganda, and Dem... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mkor7, rexxnyc, Tim DeLaney

    ...cluelessness on how to respond combine for a toxic soup of endless undying political narratives the GOPers use to get the easily manipulated to the polls to vote against the "evil" Dems.  

    I sincerely hope that the Dems, for once, handle the GOPers  with the contempt they so richly deserve.

    Maybe if the Dems had gone on the offensive to begin with, maybe this ongoing drama/republican smear campaign would have been put to rest after the first "investigation".  

    They let the GOPers natter on about Benghazi like it was a once in a lifetime event, without getting in their face and asking them--repeatedly, loudly, and on cable news interviews, why they didn't say a word about the  64 attacks on American diplomatic targets during the George W. Bush administration,

    ...including car bombs at the US embassy in Yemen and armed attackers assaulting a US consulate in Saudi Arabia...
    Resulting in dozens of diplomats/ foreign service officers/ humanitarian aid personnel deaths...

    In fact, there were There were "13 'Benghazis' That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News and without a peep from Congressional GOPers.  

    January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

    June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51...

    ...2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed..

     2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia..l Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans...

    2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed...


    etc, etc.  Issa?  Silent.  Boehner?  Silent.  Fox?  Silent.  The entire contingent of malignant hypocritical GOPers? Silent.

    But what's even worse, especially during the beginning of the Benghazi hysteria:  Dems?  Silent.  

    Democrats?  Why do they allow the GOPers to seize, and run with a false narrative, filled with omissions, deletions, and outright lies?  Why don't they demand that Issa, and all the "concerned" GOPers explain why they weren't so "concerned" and outraged over the deaths of diplomats during the Bush Administration.  Didn't the deaths of John Granville, David Foy, Laurence Foley, Barbara J. Green, etc, etc. etc. mean anything to them just because they happened to be killed on Bush's watch?  

    The fact is:  Issa and Co. weren't at all concerned about the deaths of diplomats and embassy workers during the Bush Administration because he was a Republican, and they couldn't use their deaths as a political election tool.

    If only enough people were intelligent enough to see through the cheap political theater of the GOPers, but considering that American voters voted for GWB--twice--not necessarily so.  The fact that they elected (some repeatedly) the Congressional Buffoons conducting the never-ending circus of investigate-gates--assuming that they can see the Congressional clown show for what it is might be overestimating them.

  •  Guys, Come on (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Penny GC

    Look at how the thugs have handled all the "scandals." Especially Issa. They overreach, overreact, and generally make asses out of themselves. I don't think it matters if dems participate or not. Let the thugs shoot themselves in their heads once again.

    Doubt kills more dreams than failure ever will

    by miracle11 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:07:42 AM PDT

    •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PsychoSavannah, Penny GC

      DEMs participating or not is a classic example of the tired old adage "six of one, half-dozen of the other."

      OTOH, I think Cummings sparring with Issa was rather entertaining. I wouldn't mind more of that.

      This is a nothing burger that's costing us taxpayers a ton of money. I see no downside to having a few DEMs on the committee constantly pointing that out.

      And besides, as this clown show turns really, really nutty, as I'm sure it will, the DEMs can make a nice show of it by walking out en masse.

      In fact, the idea of DEMs walking out, rather than just not participating is growing on me.

  •  More theater (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomFromNJ

    and fantasy. That's right, ladies and gentlemen, Democrats are helping Darryl Issa on this. Nice, huh?

    These seven idiots are far from the only reason "Democrats" are "blowing 2014", though--so just in case you were thinking about it, don't put all your "Reasons We Lost" eggs in this one basket.

    The seven idiots in question:

    Ron Barber (AZ-02)
    John Barrow (GA-12)
    Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
    Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
    Collin Peterson (MN-07)
    Nick Rahall (WV-03)
    Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
    My suggestion is that we call them and raise hell, until their office staff disconnects their phones. Such bullshit...

    "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

    by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:08:48 AM PDT

  •  Since many Democrats don't turn out for midterm (0+ / 0-)

    elections I recommend that the party this year just focus on the items that might draw those who usually don't vote during a midterm.

    What would those items be?

  •  Pedant Patrol (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD
    Republicans could care less about the four Americans who died at Benghazi.
    They couldn't care less.

    IOW it is not possible for Republicans to care less about the four Americans who died at Benghazi than they do, because they don't care about them at all.

    If they did, they would have investigated the seven or eight Bengazis that took place on W's watch with comparable vigor.

    I'm not sure how I feel about a Democratic presence (or lack thereof) on the Select House Committee to Inflate a Tragedy Into a Scandal (as the NYT put it).  On the one hand, it's bogus, as you point out.  On the other hand, it might provide some lovely moments of relief.

  •  This is exactly what I posted in another diary... (0+ / 0-)

    Not one single Democrat should participate on this panel to give it legitimacy under the guise of labeling it "Bi-Partisan".  Trouble is, the know-it-all Democratic brain trust doesn't listen to the common guy or gal out here in reality land, where common sense just might be present.....

    Once again, stealing defeat from the jaws of victory.  It's the Corporate Dem Mindset & Way!

    “My soul is from elsewhere, I'm sure of that, and I intend to end up there." - Rumi

    by LamontCranston on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:28:46 AM PDT

  •  That's exactly what I was thinking (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10
    Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice are perfectly capable of defending themselves.
    Why the fuck do these people want to take their time away from our business that we elected them to do, and further this bullshit?

    "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." -- JC, Matthew 6:24

    by Chi on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:29:42 AM PDT

  •  6th man for Team Corporate. They will do what (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans offer, and will give no real opposition to it, because that's what the Democratic Party does these days.

    Benghazi is another Republican sabotage attempt, and should be plainly and openly discussed in that vein.

    If that were the case, you could make hay with the REpublican CT crap of Benghazi and the IRS.

    But nobody of any import has crafted or called on the Sabotage or Saboteur frame from the Democratic side of the aisle. As far as Democrats are concerned, Republicans are honest brokers with a difference of political opinion.

    I agree with you that participating in this farce would be bad for election prospects for Democrats, but would be quite good for corporate media profits and to ensure that the horse race runs to keep people's minds off important issues for the corporate sponsors of our politics.

    Thanks for sharing bbb.

    Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

    by k9disc on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:32:17 AM PDT

  •  Issa's meltdown occurred because Cummings... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Penny GC, gramofsam1

    was there on  the IRS hearings. I can see the rationale for participating in the hearings, though I don't agree with it personally.

    No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.

    by Magster on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:33:15 AM PDT

  •  the larger question is why (0+ / 0-)

    Democrats are not conducting their own investigation into Issa's misuse of power. He appears to me to be simply misusing his position as chairman to go far beyond an inquiry and into what you accurately called it...a witchhunt.

    It's time for Democrats to stop playing nice.

    My suggestion would be for Democrats to have people on the committee as a counterbalance to Republicans...because Republicans will misuse their authority even more if there are no Democrats at all.

    And Democrats on the committee should, simultaneously, conduct their own investigation into the question of Issa's misuse of power...and talk about that during the Benghazi Special Committee proceedings, as well.

  •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)
    Democratic voters do not give a rats ass worth of cat piss about Benghazi.
    I care - I think there should have been more security and I don't think budget cuts were the cause - you use what you have and re-distribute resources where they are needed most.

    I don't think it should be a witch hunt like the Republicans have made it - but it's an opportunity to improve and to try to put systems and procedures in place to hopefully prevent these things from happening in the future.  

    The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

    by ctexrep on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:33:52 AM PDT

    •  yes (0+ / 0-)

      the witch hunt will be all about improving systems and procedures.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:54:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The time for that was two years ago. (0+ / 0-)

      It was republican political theater then and it is republican theater now.  Any salient points have already been addressed but buried under an avalanche of the ridiculous.  We already know that there should have been more security and budget cuts where part of it. What more is there to done that has not already been done in the last two years concerning security?

  •  Silence is assent (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DROzone

    How many times do we have to learn this lesson?  If you don't show up for the debate, you lose it....
    Whether it's swiftboating or climate change or background checks or- hell's bell's- pick any other "no-brainer" we've lost on.

    If you give them the playing field.... they'll play without you.

    “The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all or cannot do so well for themselves”- Lincoln

    by commonscribe on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:38:05 AM PDT

  •  Clinton, Inc. must be putting on the heat (0+ / 0-)

    .

    "When dealing with terrorism, civil and human rights are not applicable." Egyptian military spokesman.

    by Paleo on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:44:05 AM PDT

  •  Exactly, they're better off holding a news conf. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cpqemp, Penny GC, TomFromNJ

    They can start now. They can wheel out all the reports and investigation already done! And show what a waste this is.

    Why would you give this circus any credibility? The media will drown the Democratic Party out and make it a horse race. They could steal all the thunder by showing what a waste of time it is in a simple news conference.

  •  Whether or not to participate (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DROzone, Penny GC, gramofsam1

    is not so obvious. For example, if Democrats do participate, they can ask questions of the witnesses that show how the Republicans are distorting facts. And if anyone pleads the Fifth Amendment, Democrats can block grants of immunity.

  •  1000% correct (0+ / 0-)

    Pelosi is an idiot for even giving this 1 second of her time.

  •  Absofuckinlutely! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10, rubyclaire

    Where's the offense? When is what is supposed to be our team going to field an offense that wipes the floor with the Republicans and gets Democratic voters streaming to the polls? Playing in another sandbox built by Republicans ain't gonna do it. They'd be better off constantly reminding Americans, with a running tally, of the amount of time and taxpayers' money that Republicans waste on this and like political games rather than attending to the country's problems.

    Marx was an optimist.

    by psnyder on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:07:07 AM PDT

  •  Our leadership is tired. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomFromNJ, defluxion10, HCKAD

    We let the GOP control the debate no matter how absurd.

    Lets call it what it is, "a sham," and refuse to participate. Only sick people will watch this circus.

    What is so unnerving about the candidacy of Sarah Palin is the degree to which she represents—and her supporters celebrate—the joyful marriage of confidence and ignorance. SAM HARRIS

    by Cpqemp on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:08:11 AM PDT

  •  To believe it wise to play this game... (9+ / 0-)

    ...then you have to accept a few things as true:

    1. The purpose of these hearings is to arrive at the truth.

    2. The people in control of the hearing are of a fair mind, and wish to give the accused an opportunity to tell their side of the story.

    3. Given an opportunity to tell their side of the story, the accused have a story that will satisfy the electorate, by proving a negative.

    4. The media narrative about Benghazi has yet to be determined.

    None of these things are true.

    Many people in this thread have argued that not showing up is also a trap. That might be true. But it is the best way to control the story and the outcome. It makes a clear and unambiguous statement. If Sun Tzu were around there isn't a snowball's chance in hell he would advise walking into this trap. No way no how.

    Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is most important that you do it.

    by The Termite on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:10:08 AM PDT

  •  It's ridiculous we let the control the narrative (0+ / 0-)

    Democrats do clamor to explain when they stopped beating their wives don't they.

    Apparently not enough Democrats are parents, who learn early on to ignore tantrums lest they institutionalize them.

    I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires. - Susan B. Anthony Everything good a man can be, a dog already is. - pajoly

    by pajoly on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:13:12 AM PDT

  •  I am not convinced Democrats want to win. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD

    I'm really not.

    These are professional politicians at the top of their field. They should know better. And I've seen this shit so many times since 2008 that I have concluded that maybe they do know better.

    As individual politicians, they can do as well or better by being in the minority and never having to accomplish anything that would offend their financial backers and help  the American people.

    If Democrats boycott, they say that the investigation has no legitimacy. It would be an unprecedented attack on the GOP and exactly the right thing to do against the Republicans' unprecedented partisanship.

    However, starting from the top, from inauguration day of this grotesque presidency spewed from the bowels of Wall Street, the Pentagon, big oil and the NSA, Democrats have been playing the Republicans' game, letting them get away with unprecedented abuse of power as if what the GOP were doing was normal political practice.

    Of course, given the cranks and lunatics that the Republicans manage to elect, maybe playing the GOP's game is just the Democratic equivalent of batshit crazy—just stupid and crazy in a different way than GOP stupid and crazy.

    I'm not sure which is worse.

    Obama: Pro-Pentagon, pro-Wall Street, pro-drilling, pro-fracking, pro-KXL, pro-surveillance. And the only person he prosecuted for the U.S. torture program is the man who revealed it. Clinton: More of the same.

    by expatjourno on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:14:19 AM PDT

    •  I'm not sure which EXPLANATION is worse. (0+ / 0-)

      Obviously GOP stupid and crazy is worse than Democratic stupid and crazy.

      Obama: Pro-Pentagon, pro-Wall Street, pro-drilling, pro-fracking, pro-KXL, pro-surveillance. And the only person he prosecuted for the U.S. torture program is the man who revealed it. Clinton: More of the same.

      by expatjourno on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:21:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  As you well know (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      expatjourno, HCKAD

      but others seem unwilling to accept, many of our elected Democratic betters are fabulously, and unaccountably, wealthy. They will remain wealthy whether they are governing ably or ranting powerlessly from the sidelines.

      What worth is it to them to have to do the difficult work of writing, promoting, and passing legislation? Their bottom lines would not increase in value as a result, and it would only take away from their real goal: lining up business opportunities for themselves and their families in private industry.

      On those rare occasions when Sen. Feinstein, for instance, does trot herself out in front of a camera, she rails against an issue for a few minutes and then returns to her life of opulence. Folks vote for her because she's "better than the alternative," she remains rich, and nothing changes.

  •  Disagree. No more Republicans will vote because (0+ / 0-)

    Democrats show up to these hearings. No less Democrats will show up to vote just because some Democrats attend these hearings. It's not like 100% of Democrats need to spend every waking second "focusing on other things" and ignoring any mud that Republicans throw. There's always a balance, and some mud control is needed both to govern and win elections, or a party just looks spineless (especially to so-called "Independents").

    If Republicans are watching, they should hear some Democrats speak so that they hear at least once in their lives that the paranoid conspiracy theories from Fox News are just fantasies. If no Democrats show up, but they still subpoena Clinton, Rice, Kerry, etc. it will encourage the Republican base, not discourage it. They won't say, "Well, the Democrats didn't show up, so this thing must not be legitimate."

    Also, it's not like this will be the only thing Democrats can  focus on. They can do many other things and try to change the agenda in the media. But, these hearing will be getting attention. There's not stopping that. They might as well do a little judo and use Republicans' stupidity against them.

    Just doing my part to piss off right wing nuts, one smart ass comment at a time.

    by tekno2600 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:54:53 AM PDT

  •  Don't legitimize Issa (4+ / 0-)

    If the Dems participate, they legitimize it.  Simple as that.  If the Republicans have a mono-partisan rant-fest, it turns into the tin foil party.

  •  Worth a rec to BBB just for 2 sentences (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD

    #1 Democrats in the minority typically don't behave like a group thirsty for power, but like weak flowers that have lost their nutrients,  wilting and dying under even the best sunlight.

    Perfection.

    #2 get out in the country and talk things that Democratic voters give a shit about and stop tripping over your shoelaces to kiss up to Hillary Clinton.

    Sound advice. Chances Dems will take it, or think it up on their own - about the same as the odds Lady Gaga will call me up tomorrow and invite me over. See #1.

  •  Republicans would LOVE Democrats to join... (0+ / 0-)

    ...their Kangaroo Kommittee (as long as Democrats don't get an equal voice and equal authority).  What does that tell you?

    It ought to tell us everything we need to know about what they have in mind for this sham - and this trap.

    All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

    by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:04:07 AM PDT

  •  To think this is "blowing" the 2014 election (0+ / 0-)

    requires you to believe not that the hearings will drive turnout on their side, but that opposition to the hearings will drive Democratic turnout.  Benghazi won't be a story with the hearings marginalized for no dem participation, and they won't be a story if dems participate.

    Remember the Clinton impeachment?  I mostly don't, except for the moment when Tom Harkin stood up and called bullshit on the notion that the Senators were Ju-rors, as Bob Barr phrased it.  

    A few friendly questions from Dems isn't the worst thing - either position (boycott, participation) has merit, so long as dems DON"T put up someone who'd join in the republican witch hunt.  

    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

    by Loge on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:06:16 AM PDT

  •  BeiRUT!!! (Benghazi) BeiRUT!! (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans anchor their Ad Biz schemes to three main connections: abortion, Ronald Reagan, and White self-pity. There's never a lie goes out that they don't attach one of the three.

    Republican obsession with Benghazi started with a panicky scream that someone would compare Obama/Libya with Reagan/Lebanon.

    Fact is, Reagan knew nothing about the military. He blundered through two years in Lebanon that get an "F" doing a normal Lessons Learned Analysis.

    Israel had invaded Lebanon in June of 1982. Reagan sent in American troops as U.N. Peacekeepers:

    -- August-September 1982: Reagan withdrew the 800 Marines protecting the remaining civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Reagan's "Christian" allies went in two weeks later -- for revenge related to the assassination of Bachir Gemayel -- and slaughtered as many as 3,500 men, women, and children. The Palestinians did not assassinate Gemayel; they were easy unarmed targets.

    -- Some point in 1982 shiploads of materials start arriving to Saddam Hussein for the Iran-Iraq War. But apparently no one told the White House. CIA had its own military/foreign policy and based on the memoirs and later interviews nobody bothered to tell the Old Man or his hapless appointees. Saddam got to kill tens of thousands more Iranians. And yes, Iran decided to go for "Just Retaliation" actions... in Lebanon.

    -- April 1983: U.S. embassy on Rue de la Paris truck bombed with 63 dead. (SoS Kerry gets that number wrong repeatedly.) U.S. Navy ships had bombarded residential areas, which made it very easy to coordinate local resources.

    -- September 1983: Marine BLT Barracks and the French barracks truck bombed. All out Iranian technical attack with liquid butane over a huge PETN igniter over tons of solid marble. Both buildings looked like they had been nuked.

    -- October 1983: office building in Tyre truck bombed. 30 dead. Comm center for military operations in southern Lebanon.

    -- September 1984: the new U.S. embassy uphill Beirut bombed with 17 killed.

    Five major truck bombings, four with Iranian technology and operations support. 415 dead. Maybe a few more who died later from injuries. And more service people dead from snipers and mortar attacks.

    No one in the White House had any idea that the Iranians were involved.

    No one in the White House knew that CIA was supplying Saddam Hussein for his war with Iran. (From their memoirs.)

    No one in Reagan's DoD set up even a review of traffic control procedures after the embassy had been hit in April 1983. We had 1,800 troops ashore and they were left wide open. Mindless incompetence. What else?

    And then finally, in 1985, Iran used its new prestige as a revenge getter to put together Hizb Allah. They consolidated Shi'ia Lebanon and put 10,000 of their own elite troops in country.

    Yeah, they're still there. We're not.

    Iran held (and holds) annual ceremonies commemorating those martyred truck drivers. CIA says it took them 20 years to do the "2+2," even having Farsi newspaper reports in hand. (Or more likely CIA doped it out immediately and sat on the info.)

    Reagan as Commander in Chief: useless.

    One more comparison: Crimea/Ukraine today vs. Russia shooting down KAL-007 in September 1983. Reagan couldn't get off his butt to lay down sanctions against the Russians for that one. 269 dead. The White House had no response, nothing but name calling. Useless.

    Meanwhile, Obama has won the War on Terror. 10 dead Americans over 5 years. 3 in Boston, 3 in Algeria, 4 at Benghazi. For a war, that's winning big time. The opposite of Reagan.

    Truth Out: Republicans Didn't "Benghazi" Ronald Reagan

    Media Matters: Hyping Benghazi Madness

    "Teflon Ronnie"... hell no. Obama as Eisenhower II... you betcha.

    "Stealing kids' lunch money makes them strong and independent." -- Paul "False Prophet" Ryan von Koch

    by waterstreet2013 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:30:09 AM PDT

  •  Have to disagree (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    delver, DROzone

    with the beginning of this diary, "Republicans could care less about the four Americans who died at Benghazi. Republicans have made a sport out of getting Americans killed overseas for years, competing over who can run up the death score the most." I know a bunch of good-hearted people on the right, and none of them believe this or are like this. We are not going to grow our side of the political debate with this kind of statement any more than people on the right who say things like this about us.

  •  No - we need to fight (0+ / 0-)

    I understand your sentiment but it's easier to run a kangaroo "court" with no one there to fight back. Your reasoning makes sense to you, but the viewers, that matter, etc, will see Repubs making what seem good points etc and think Democrats are just sulking. People admire fighters more than haughty "boycotters" just about any time.

    •  I just want to add (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      delver

      that if we want to be better than them, we have to act better than them. That's all. I agree with pushing back but I can't agree with calling them names and ascribing dark attitudes towards them that I know they don't have.  

  •  I don't really see how it makes much difference. (0+ / 0-)

    What races exactly is it going to effect?  I doubt the Republican base cares if the panel is bipartisan and no one else will pay attention.

    •  It affects "the tilt" (0+ / 0-)

      It's hard to say just what races it would affect other than Hillary's chances. Compare overall statistical effects of global warming to IDing whether a particular hurricane would or wouldn't have happened. But those who say we can stay out, nobody cares etc, do not understand human psychology and sociology. Letting someone tirade without reply sends a message to the limbic system, the other side is weak and won't fight. You must understand these issues instead of living in la-la-land.

      •  Sure, everything has an effect (0+ / 0-)

        But is anyone going to even be aware of these hearings or what Democrats say in them?  Fox news certainly isn't going to show clips of Democrats making good points.  

        I'm not saying Democrats shouldn't go, I'm saying that whatever effect this stuff has is going to be so small that it's not worth getting aggravated with the Democrats over.

        What Democrats really need to do is tour the country and get on all the media they can't pointing out how many Americans are going to die due to Republican refusal to expand medicaid, how we would have a higher minimum wage and immigration reform and something done about student loans if it weren't for Republicans.  This stuff is the smallest of potatoes.  Republicans are literally killing poor people, why is that not in the news?  

  •  tipped & recced by comment (0+ / 0-)

    and I'll enter T/Rs from my smartphone at lunch.

    great diary and about bleepin' time !

    :)

    “Vote for the party closest to you, but work for the movement you love.” ~ Thom Hartmann 6/12/13

    by ozsea1 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 11:14:32 AM PDT

  •  Never leave crap unrebutted (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    delver, David Jarman

    Democrats must be there or all we will have is unrebutted lies on the airwaves. ALWAYS respond to swift boating aggressively.

  •  Good article, but........ (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD

    This is a great article, but I have one little grind about the grammar which is a common mistake.

    Brooklynbadboy starts his article with the words "Republicans could care less about the....."

    It should be.... Republicans COULDN'T care less..."

    Sorry about that.

    •  Pedanticism... (0+ / 0-)

      The implicit part of the phrase "could care less" is the ironic spoken delivery that completes the phrase, but can't really be expressed properly in text.

      Gad, the Dems are full of the same bunch of colorless pedants that make the Labour Party so miserable, drab, and awful.

      (Any bets how soon the pedants rise to the bait on "pedanticism"?)

  •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

    I am so tired of watching Democrats just walk right into these left hooks thrown at them.
    To all the people here who are just terrified at all the media attention this will bring and thats why we just have to have Democrats on the committee, let me ask this; Just how much media attention did the 3 (4?) previous hearing on Benghazi get?
    The media is bored with this story, because there is nothing new.
    The Democrats will not have any power to call witnesses, will not have any ability to influence the foregone conclusions the committe will release (wanna bet the conclusions are already being written somewhere?) and are being allowed for one reason and one reason only. That's so the Republicans can paint this as a bi-partisan effort.
    The Democrats should declare simply this. Give uis equal representation on the committee and equal power and we'll participate, otherwise go pound sand.

  •  Agree completely--ignore it, walk out. eom. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    radv005
  •  ah sun szu (0+ / 0-)
    It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.
    so we know the repubs, they think they've got some dirt. this is politics.

    i don't think it matters either way if dems go to this committee. NOBODY CARE ABOUT BENGHAZI.

    meh.

  •  No pant shitting here. This is actually good news (0+ / 0-)

    ..in some ways, depending on how f'icking crazy the republican base gets throughout the whole "BullGhazi" episode, especially if impeachment fever takes over, which this actually is without the formality of it-1998

    Clinton impeachment Polls 1998

    So yes we Dems need to GOTV and this whole Kangaroo "trial" will indeed help get the RWNJ base fired up, and yes having Dems involved may led credence to the circus, but it could also help exacerbate the lunacy on the right too. Especially if Dems play it correctly.

    So while this is true:

    Dont shit yournpants over the media. They are in it for the hype, which will soon evaporate for lack of public interest.  Instead, we need to stay focused on things Democrats care about. Which aint Bullghazi.
    If this turns into the circus it sure looks like it is the media will be all over it and stay there (as happened in 1998).

    One false move by just one idiot loudmouth republican and the whole MSM which will feed off of this, will just as quickly turn  and happily feed on the GOP. And that idiot move is damn near guaranteed to happen with this crop of GOP amateurs.

    I'm not saying Dems, if they attend should In any way take this seriously, but let it be absolutely clear how much derision they feel about it. We have a few Dems that are very good at that. Pelosi for one.

  •  I am just not sure I agree, though I wouldn't (0+ / 0-)

    fight for this position too hard since i'm not sure.

    I believe by letting them have the whole thing to themselves you allow them to so what ever they want, and we know that won't be anything honest.

    By having Dems on the committee looking at the same documents at the same time it makes it very hard to just cherry pick what you want with someone 5 feet from you seeing what you are doing.

    I see the point putting Dems on it add credibility, but look at the Birther BS that has finally faded away. What made it go away was not ignoring it, but showing evidence and laugh at how absurd it was.

    This 'ignore it' strategy backfires on dems all the time (ask Kerry) and I could see it happening again.

    If it were my call i'd put a few strong dems (like Grayson) to laugh at them to their faces as they try to manipulate the data to show something thats not there.

    IMHO

    Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

    by fToRrEeEsSt on Fri May 09, 2014 at 02:58:02 PM PDT

  •  The left does not get it. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DROzone, coffejoe

    "Dont give it any form of legitimacy.'

    Do you think these hearings require any democratic presence to legitimize them? The mindset of the American people is such that they will see the non participation of Democrats as a demonstration of cowardice, like witnesses that will not testify. It does not matter if this is correct or not. When will the left learn that you can't rely on being so called correct to make the case to the rest of the American people. Appearances matter even if they logically should not.

  •  GOP aims (0+ / 0-)

    are to embarrass not legislate, condemn not debate in an honest and forthcoming manner, issue insane statements designed to inflame and torture the already tortured minds of their ignorant base and to above all, se the tide in motion to repeal all that has been done by this administration, set us on a course of war and undermine democracy.
    Here is their scorecard: Voter suppression, refusal to allow Medicaid insurance to the needy, no on minimum wage proposal, no on extended unemployment benefits, yes on corporate lowering of taxes that support a profit based system and outsourcing, anonymous donations of any amount, complete disdain for the voters of this country, self-centered attempts at smoke screens, i.e. Issa, who makes a good impersonation of Joe McCarthy, 50 attempts to repeal ACA (taxpayers pay for this fraud) and last but not least, their insane racism against the first man of color in the Oval Office. Now GOP get ready for the first woman.

  •  The Democrats need to remind (0+ / 0-)

    the Republicans that THEY, the Republicans, cut security funding for that Embassy and others. The Democrats need to remind the TeaPubs that 60 members of Embassies and some ambassadors were killed during the Bush administration.

  •  I do have one queston. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Silina, coffejoe

    During Baby Bush's administration there were 13 attacks on our embassies, consulates, and outpost.  There were 85 Americans and security personnel killed.  Also, over 200 "locals" were killed.

    There was not a single word from the republiscums.

    Why is this when they voted to cut the State Department's budget for security in the years before Benghazi.

    This kangaroo court is nothing more than a political stunt.

  •  Hmmm? (0+ / 0-)

    Ceding the entire circus to the GOP sounds like an awful idea to me. Just my immediate take on it. Why look like we're running away?

  •  It's conspiracy theory. For once ... (0+ / 0-)

    we should trust that the vast majority of the American people recognize it as such.

    The best thing to do would be to ignore the hell out of it.

    Or, like Cliven Bundy, just give them the mike and let them speak.

  •  I have questions for the Bengazi panel. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coffejoe

    It is interesting that the video Innocence of the Muslims was financed by a Coptic Christian with a criminal background.  The spokes person for the production was a Tea Party Republican and critic of Mitt Romney, who calls himself a spy.  He is on record saying that the video would cause a lot of trouble when it was released.  The video was broadcast in the Middle East and internet chatter erupted during the lead up to 09/11, 2012.

    The result was riots and scores killed.   The video was an attempt by supporters of Mitt Romney to create an, "October Surprise."  

    On Sept 11th the CIA station in Bengazi was attacked with heavy weapons and burned.  The attackers seemed to have intelligence on the layout and security measures of the CIA station.  

    In the lead up to Election Day, right wing media outlets featured mercenaries that came forward with false accusations that they were told to "stand down."  These mercenaries were later proven to be lying.  The intention was to disrupt the foreign policy of President Obama and damage Secretary Hillary Clinton's political legacy.  

    My question for the panel is: Were the attackers directed by unseen operatives with a partisan agenda and did the attackers receive tactical advice and intelligence.  Were the attackers Libyans or paid mercenaries or both?   Were the mercenaries that lied on FOX News involved in the attack?

  •  No Democrats on the "Committee" (0+ / 0-)

    I have to agree with BBB on this (don't always). There is nothing to be gained by legitimizing this Republican election campaign ploy.
     For those who think Democrats can use the hearings to rebut GOP points or in some way illuminate the actual motives (Republican re-election and control of the House) behind the Committee are living in their own bubble.
     Republicans will be a majority, and thus able to subpoena anyone they wish. Republicans will be the majority and able to issue whatever "conclusions" they wish. A Republican is the Chairman and will recognize, and more importantly, not recognize whomever he chooses.
     Nor will the MSM report any such tricks. After all, it's just the way politics "works"...
     

  •  Benghazi (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    If the Democratic leadership in the House is not able to see this opportunity for what it is and how to use it to their advantage, then perhaps in November we need to consider new leadership. Gold mines like this are once in a lifetime. Except for the GOP faithful (whom you will never convert) do you really believe that intelligent, fair-minded independents won't see what a desperate sham the GOP is attempting to resurrect.  They have no record to stand on except obstruction and endless conspiracy theories that have never been shown to hold an ounce of truth.

    Use this investigation to demonstrate how lame and wasteful this "high-level investigation" truly is along with the Congressmen that called for it. Turn the tables. Make the GOP Inquisition show how little they have except conspiracies that can't hold water and a lack of ideas for creating jobs and energizing the economy except tax relief for the wealthy and repealing the ACA. I truly hope Nancy Pelosi is playing "rope-a-dope" to suck these idiots in to their own destruction.

  •  It's not "swiftboating". It's the shutdown. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HCKAD

    A number of Kossacks apparently think that the correct model to use in evaluating possible Democrat collaboration in "The Great GOP Ben-Ga-Zee Clown Show" is the "swiftboating" of John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign - and Kerry's critical failure to respond quickly and forcefully to Karl Rove's smear campaign.

    I disagree.

    IMO, the appropriate model to consult is Democrats' unified response to the GOP October 2013 federal government shutdown.  As you'll recall, Republicans had completely painted themselves into a corner, threatening to shut down the government unless "Obamacare" was repealed.  

    Democrats called their bluff, by doing...nothing.  They just let Republicans stew in their own juices, with Rethugs becoming more desperate day by day, shrieking at the tops of their lungs about "the Obama government shutdown", trying vainly to slander President Obama and Majority Leader Reid for their unwillingness to "negotiate".

    In the end, Republicans were forced to concede defeat.  And what they ultimately extracted in concessions from the Democrats was...precisely nothing.  They ended up exactly where they were prior to the shutdown - but with their public approval ratings dropping right through the floor.

    Democrats successfully faced them down because: 1) Democrats stuck together, 2) Democrats stuck to their own agenda, and 3) Democrats refused to panic; refused to get stampeded by GOP threats and intimidation.

    Same dynamics apply right now with respect to "Ben-Ga-Zee":  There's no reason whatsoever for us to interrupt Republicans - or try to save them - while they're busy shooting themselves in the foot.

    "Please proceed, Republicans...".

    All that is necessary for the triumph of the Right is that progressives do nothing.

    by Mystic Michael on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:52:30 PM PDT

  •  Dog Food (0+ / 0-)

    Once again our local Veterinarians in Memphis are warning pet owners not to buy Jerky-treats for their pets that are made in China, even if they have Purina written all over them. The FDA should impound 100%  of all shipments on the dock for testing and if the vet's assertions are found to be true, burn them all in an incinerator at Purina's cost and fine them till they bleed.

  •  I dismiss the premise of your diary. (0+ / 0-)

    Your entire premise is that the press will get it right and even if the press doesn't, it will be corrected no harm no foul.

    And Al Gore invented the internet.

    Once the media lends legitimacy to whatever bullshit the GOP pulls out of its collective asses, you won't be able to put that toothpaste back in the tube.

    What the Right Wing calls "being politically correct" is what my mama used to teach me was "being polite".

    by Walt starr on Sat May 10, 2014 at 05:18:44 AM PDT

  •  War Games (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeninSC

    To quote the computer's conclusion at the end of this 80's sorta classic - "the only way to win is not to play".  The smart move is to ignore the sideshow and let them play in the corner with themselves.  

  •  I agree with everything you've said! (0+ / 0-)
Meteor Blades, claude, bink, Thumb, Duckman GR, paradox, Ed in Montana, Doug in SF, Sylv, Bollox Ref, DeminNewJ, Paleo, Radiowalla, Odysseus, dalemac, teacherken, importer, AdmiralNaismith, karlpk, Shockwave, wu ming, mslat27, LeftHandedMan, devtob, red moon dog, expatjourno, bostonjay, tom 47, hubcap, niemann, 88kathy, EricS, cyberKosFan, annrose, OCD, highacidity, shanikka, rabel, lorikay4, Alna Dem, dksbook, SneakySnu, tomephil, kharma, psnyder, mnguitar, Steven Payne, defluxion10, GreatDane, Timbuk3, lcrp, 2dot, Dood Abides, hbanks, outragedinSF, bwintx, zerelda, mungley, Hillbilly Dem, Deward Hastings, xxdr zombiexx, nailbender, fijiancat, bloomer 101, NoMoreLies, caul, Lying eyes, democracy inaction, Jersey Girl, basquebob, dewtx, stagemom, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, Kevskos, Gary Norton, owlbear1, bleeding blue, majcmb1, Sun Tzu, where4art, LABobsterofAnaheim, GregGilman, skyounkin, Little Lulu, SBandini, spunhard, FindingMyVoice, sillia, mightymouse, Alan Arizona, xaxnar, Jim R, accumbens, ThatSinger, Jim P, tarheelblue, golem, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, Medium Head Boy, Kingsmeg, cybersaur, edwardssl, profundo, dopper0189, rl en france, koNko, AoT, dougymi, kck, NBBooks, The Hindsight Times, Libby Shaw, katrinka, Zwoof, Unitary Moonbat, middleagedhousewife, llbear, thenekkidtruth, AnnieS, CA Nana, lastamendment, zeke7237, suspiciousmind, Ian Reifowitz, shaharazade, kurious, markthshark, cpresley, old wobbly, john07801, BeninSC, Habitat Vic, Haningchadus14, hawaii2, whl, AdamSelene, devis1, Dartagnan, terabytes, newpioneer, HCKAD, mudslide, carpunder, Wreck Smurfy, leonard145b, skod, tj iowa, Steve CXS, Ralphdog, gizmo59, fb, MKinTN, mconvente, ChocolateChris, Port City Moon, GAS, MikePhoenix, OleHippieChick, Involuntary Exile, Cat Servant, Laughing Vergil, jamess, mikeconwell, TomFromNJ, rssrai, tofumagoo, RandomNonviolence, hwmnbn, smartdemmg, Jeff Y, temptxan, codairem, JBL55, LaFeminista, maggiejean, Bule Betawi, rubyclaire, J Ash Bowie, Ripeness Is All, J M F, Ravenstream, ceebee7, bsmechanic, banjolele, maryabein, Methinks They Lie, mkor7, fToRrEeEsSt, geebeebee, CaliSista, dskoe, MKSinSA, TheOpinionGuy, glitterlust, lastman, kevinpdx, KenInCO, sfarkash, Little Flower, astral66, Essephreak, Elm City Tree, cassandraX, FogCityJohn, Captain Marty, Susan Grigsby, Anima, Proud Mom and Grandma, Simple, ATFILLINOIS, Puddytat, DerAmi, Jaimas, melfunction, Patate, DrTerwilliker, BlueFranco, ericlewis0, Oh Mary Oh, soaglow, mallyroyal, slice, Wisdumb, TheHalfrican, Onomastic, ebbet, PaDemTerry, Front Toward Enemy, slowbutsure, implicate order, La Gitane, UtahLibrul, CoExistNow, Alice Olson, Nebraska68847Dem, PorridgeGun, thomask, Santa Susanna Kid, muddy boots, sound of progress, diffrntdrummr, Joe Jackson, bakeneko, Hayate Yagami, this is only a test, Miggles, SteelerGrrl, leftykook, annecros, No one gets out alive, mikeVA, BlueDragon, wolf advocate, quill, jacey, anodnhajo, greenbastard, rexxnyc, a2nite, Deep Texan, Dave in AZ, stellaluna, This old man, peachcreek, reginahny, MartyM, marking time, sweatyb, AverageJoe42, Glen The Plumber, dotdash2u, wasatch, Hammerhand, allensl, Lily O Lady, Blue Bell Bookworm, jusjtim35, simple serf, akadjian, SanFernandoValleyMom, goodpractice, leeleedee, howabout, Grandson named me Papa, ModerateJosh, nice marmot, BadKitties, notevenclosetoonepercent, Retroactive Genius, Mystic Michael, htowngenie, The Marti, RUNDOWN, eagleray, Capt Crunch, FarEastLA, Penny GC, gnosticator, Yang Guang, leoluminary, gmfp, Richard Villiers, Lennykat, sotiredofusernames, lilyf, Sandika, rarely comments, dcnblues, bobcat41702

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site