This one isn't going away folks, as much as two of my favorite people wishes it would.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... ept-quiet/

More than seven months after the attack Sept. 11, 2012, on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the Obama administration continues to defend itself against allegations from House Republicans that the administration has not fully cooperated with Congress on the investigation into the attack.

On Tuesday, both President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry addressed claims being made by House Oversight and Foreign Affairs Committee leaders that the administration is impeding the Congressional testimony of State Department and CIA employees who survived the attack.

That albatross getting heavy big guy? Guess what, it's going to keep dragging you down.

I hear folks talking about Hillary in 16' and before this i would have agreed, but if she thinks this debacle won't hurt her in the general, she's ****in stupid. I don't think it would come out in the Democratic primaries, but you can be damned sure the GOP will give this sound byte heavy rotation over a montage of the people killed in this attack and while it's low class, it's true; I can't begrudge the tactic.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny3bOmey-BE[/youtube]

You really want to find out what happened Obama administration? Quit suppressing it. You do know what happened, though, don't you? That's the only reason you would try to keep the lid on the box. It's not going to work forever. Keep trying, though; it's fun to watch. When it's all said and done, after his impeachment, Obama can do antiperspirant ads.

Just lied to the American people, don't let them see you sweat!

I suspect this scandal will eventually fade away the same way the Iran-Contra scandal did for Ronald Reagan & his administration. Obama's opposition obviously won't let this be go away quickly, and with 24/7 news entities hyping it nonstop it'll take longer to fade than Iran-Contra, but I highly doubt it'll result in an impeachment.

Open and transparent.

Like a pair of footie pajamas.

its amazing how the majority of the news media's are failing to report this, for what it is. only a handful of news outlets, and mostly conservative ones; are reporting 'play-by-play' updates. the rest cared more about the Cleavland case, jody, and nj governors lap-band surgery.

-can you imagine if sara palin said: "what difference does it make" as hillary did?? the left would be all over her.

It's a Democrat under fire. You were surprised? If it was a Republican, FOX would be notoriously silent and CNN and MSNBC all over it like John Edwards on a female staffer.

Let's all pretend like this isn't how every single previous administration would handle it.

I can think of another major investigation in the last 15 years that was stonewalled... I'll let you guess which one I'm talking about. And, it was primarily perpetrated by a Republican administration.

mattblancarte wrote:Let's all pretend like this isn't how every single previous administration would handle it.

I can think of another major investigation in the last 15 years that was stonewalled... I'll let you guess which one I'm talking about. And, it was primarily perpetrated by a Republican administration.

the left is still taking punches as bush, for sitting an extra 6/7 minutes and continuing to read to the students when 9/11 began. WHERE WAS OBAMA DURING THIS WHOLE EVENT? WHY DIDNT OBAMA DO ANYTHING?

No offense, but I think you may want to thoroughly review this forum's guidelines. welcome-to-the-politics-forum-rules-rea ... 20940.html Specifically, note the guidelines on constructing strawmen.

There is no possible way that you could have thought I was referring to Bush's short time spent in classroom during the 9/11 attacks.

I was referring to the Bush administration's stonewall of effective 9/11 investigation, which I find to be much more egregious.

Furthermore, I'd appreciate you refraining from knee-jerk reactions when the Bush administration is used for historical perspective on an issue.

mattblancarte wrote:No offense, but I think you may want to thoroughly review this forum's guidelines. welcome-to-the-politics-forum-rules-rea ... 20940.html Specifically, note the guidelines on constructing strawmen.

There is no possible way that you could have thought I was referring to Bush's short time spent in classroom during the 9/11 attacks.

I was referring to the Bush administration's stonewall of effective 9/11 investigation, which I find to be much more egregious.

Furthermore, I'd appreciate you refraining from knee-jerk reactions when the Bush administration is used for historical perspective on an issue.

i honestly had no idea what nor who(which president) you were talking about. so idk why you are getting your panties in a bunch lol

Ah, okay. No worries. I just have a pretty low tolerance for the "Bush never happened" and "Dems only blame Bush" arguments. That horse has been beaten to a pulp so much that you'd have to use DNA testing to identify it.

Bush? Panties? What? I'd rather talk about politics.

I... uh...

themadscientist wrote:Bush? Panties? What? I'd rather talk about politics.