Posted on 11/16/2012 4:49:49 AM PST by LD Jackson
100K+ is peanuts when you are talking well-placed jobs to buy silence.
100K+. . .piffle. . .lint in a DC pocket.
And like I just posted, not exactly a large amount of money to buy silence or cooperation.
Heck, a senior manager (non-executive) is anty number of coproations in DC get paid 150K annually or more.
Heck, a senior manager (non-executive) and any number of corporations in DC get paid 150K annually or more.
I agree with you in this matter.
I heard one congressman from Texas say he is wanting to get a Special Prosecutor as in Watergate. That Special Ops and other military are demanding this happen. That if enough people begin to call for it, it could happen. Although it would take Obama or Holder to call for one, ain't that a hoot?
Yet if enough people rise up and DEMAND it, it could happen. Where's the Petitions?
With this administration, Not one of our children, grandchildren, etc. who serve in the Military SAFE anymore. THEY "ARE" EXPENDABLE.
The difference between me and the author is that I know Obama lied....as usual.
Obama's White House shows total ignorance of history. Terrorism against the US goes back to the 1920s when the FBI actually was directed by the President to fight it by arresting several thousand terrorists and subversives. The round-up was called the Palmer Raids. Look it up, Mr. Obama.
When I read numerous posts here that end in "such and such is beyond me" or "I just cannot understand such and such", it re-inforces the Pauline-Kaelism that we conservatives live in today, insulated from the rest of the country.
What I have noticed is that this sense of outrage and shock (rightly) expressed here is limited only to conservative websites and conservative outlets. The rest of the country largely feels no such sense of outrage. For them, Benghazi is just another unfortunate situation caused by the "events in the Middle East". They have compartmentalized it in such fashion, and are not going to spend their time and energy agonizing over it. They do not see the relevance in the larger context of national security, and do not share our perspective of how this illustrates dereliction of duty.
Since the media reflects this "who cares" attitude over Benghazi, they never developed a coherent narrative that put it all in context. Romney did not have an opportunity, in the absence of such a narrative in the public consciousness, to parlay it into something damning about 0. The low information voters who are independents would have been confused if Romney had made a big deal about it, since that would be the first time they would have heard about it.
I just don't think this story has any legs. The official narrative is that it was the fog of war, early information was unreliable, and we will wait to finish the investigation to find out what happened. The fact that help was denied can never be proven beyond hearsay and low level officials in the State Department.
Just like the lead up to the election showed a disconnect between us and the rest of the country, with people here expecting a R&R landslide and the rest expecting 0 to win easily, this event also shows a big disconnect. Outside of conversative outlets, people have shrugged this off, and no one thinks it is as serious as Watergate. Here and on other conservative outlets, we are convinced it is far worse than Watergate.
Let’s say he does, ...and then what?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.