Clinton blames Bush for Benghazi

[PSGator66]

Is she really the next Democratic presidential nominee? I guess if Obama got re-elected anything can happen.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journal...ecure-Benghazi

[rivergator]

I know Breitbart claims in the headline that she's blaming Bush. But if you actually read it, she's blaming Congress for a lack of funds but also says that money isn't the only issue.

[MichiGator2002]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I know Breitbart claims in the headline that she's blaming Bush. But if you actually read it, she's blaming Congress for a lack of funds but also says that money isn't the only issue.

And this works because there are enough millions out there who would believe that there simply was not a dime to be scrabbled together, not two nickels to rub together, reallocated to improved diplomatic security at a site whose neighbors all felt threatened enough to clear out completely. And apparently not even enough money to follow their example. This talking point was not divided to speak to the best and brightest among the population, it was to those lower wattages that were able to see through the cloying fog of banality to say "hey, why did that guy Ben kill the diplomat?" -- "Shh, it was the Republicans fault".

[PSGator66]

Blame anyone but themselves is the Dem's mantra and it has gotten old. By the way Obama's approval rating is lower than Richard Nixon's at this point.

[cocodrilo]

"What difference does it make?" - Hillary Clinton

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I know Breitbart claims in the headline that she's blaming Bush. But if you actually read it, she's blaming Congress for a lack of funds but also says that money isn't the only issue.

Yes and that claim is bogus

[bgator85]

I am not quite sure how anyone can read that quote and come away with her blaming Bush. The headline is a complete misrepresentation of what was actually said.

[gatorman_07732]

She should have known better than to mention Bush's name and known she was going to be beat over the head for it. At any rate, she is just filled with excuses. It's not all about money, but it's about money. That ranks right up there with I'm have responsibility but not responsible.

[gatornana]

Now, it's not all a question of money. I am the first to say that. You know, you have to have the right people and the right job, making the right decisions. But money is a factor. And ever since the Bush administration, our requests for security monies from Congress have not been met. So you've had to make priority decisions. And it's been difficult.

Isn't she factually correct?

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gatornana

Isn't she factually correct?

No, security of Americans are the first responsibility of the government. There were requests from the embassy for security and it was ignored.

[DeanMeadGator]

Originally Posted by gatornana

Isn't she factually correct?

It was just discovered that Bush caused AIDS, typhoid fever, polio, TB, and the West Nile virus.

[Gatorrick22]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I know Breitbart claims in the headline that she's blaming Bush. But if you actually read it, she's blaming Congress for a lack of funds but also says that money isn't the only issue.

She had hours to get help there in time to save those lives, but didn't allow it - what her excuse for that?

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by Gatorrick22

She had hours to get help there in time to save those lives, but didn't allow it - what her excuse for that?

she didn't allow it? please try to learn a little about the subject ....

[gator421]

Originally Posted by bgator85

I am not quite sure how anyone can read that quote and come away with her blaming Bush. The headline is a complete misrepresentation of what was actually said.

Read is the operative word.

[baygator1]

Originally Posted by gatornana

Isn't she factually correct?

She may be, but she's also clearly attempting a blame-shift. Since she brought Bush into the issue, I think the better questions are these:

How many years has it been since there was a Bush administration?

Was it the Bush administration that received the specific requests for bolstered security from Ambassador Stevens and his staff?

Was it the Bush administration that had a significant amount of intelligence and warnings about the situation last year in Benghazi?

And, was it the Bush administration that did nothing while our allies cleared out their diplomats in the region just prior to murder of our diplomats last year?

[ATLitigator]

Originally Posted by rivergator

she didn't allow it? please try to learn a little about the subject ....

why didnt she demand it?

[gatorman_07732]

Anybody ever notice that for a strong feminist like Hillary, she sure is used by men to go out in public and lie for them.

[wargunfan]

Originally Posted by MichiGator2002

And this works because there are enough millions out there who would believe that there simply was not a dime to be scrabbled together, not two nickels to rub together, reallocated to improved diplomatic security at a site whose neighbors all felt threatened enough to clear out completely. And apparently not even enough money to follow their example. This talking point was not divided to speak to the best and brightest among the population, it was to those lower wattages that were able to see through the cloying fog of banality to say "hey, why did that guy Ben kill the diplomat?" -- "Shh, it was the Republicans fault".

Wouldn't it have been nice if the Obamas could have sacrificed just one of their twenty million dollar Hawaiian vacations to pay for a detachment of Marines to protect American diplomats in Benghazi? Oh well, we must set priorities and the president does need his down time with the family.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by baygator1

She may be, but she's also clearly attempting a blame-shift. Since she brought Bush into the issue, I think the better questions are these:

How many years has it been since there was a Bush administration?

Was it the Bush administration that received the specific requests for bolstered security from Ambassador Stevens and his staff?

Was it the Bush administration that had a significant amount of intelligence and warnings about the situation last year in Benghazi?

And, was it the Bush administration that did nothing while our allies cleared out their diplomats in the region just prior to murder of our diplomats last year?

+1