Just another Delaware WordPress.com weblog
May 5, 2014 in "Stupid is, 12 Election Results, Accountability, Darrell Issa, Death of Conservatism, Dumbing of America, Republican Death Panels, republican ineptitude, Republican National Committee, Republicans = Bad Guys, Republicans R Babies, Tea Party versus Republicans, telemarketers
To those who’ve been insufferable to all others… Ha, ha. Treat yourselves.. Number 37,449.
(And if anyone wants to know the next fact up the trivial ladder of relevance it is this….)
Number 37,450: The Hittites domesticated asses, horses, cows and raised honey bees.
kavips
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 5, 2014 at 11:18 am
bemused2
Four Americans died in Benghazi.
We still don’t know why, or if those deaths could have been prevented.
Why mock that?
May 5, 2014 at 11:54 am
kavips
Oh silly.
We do know! … We heard the exact chain of events, some 50 times now? Why listen to the same thing, 51 times?
The only reason we had to hear this 50 times and now 51… is: :
BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS REALLY REALLY LOST BAD IN THE ELECTION
Being the cataclysmic failures that they are, both in human and political terms, they need something to take their mind off of their abysmal humiliating defeat they suffered in 2012…..
Benghazi is like the smart-ass bar patron, who gets too drunk and begins insulting the staff, and gets brutally beat up and tossed outside head first onto the cement, gets run over by two cars and then a tractor trailer. The police when they come to investigate, park on his leg, and we wakes up in the hospital 3 weeks later, and says…. “sure told those guys off, didn’t I…
Ha, ha, ha,,…. 🙂 Silly.
May 5, 2014 at 2:44 pm
bemused2
You’re insulting dead American citizens. That makes no sense to me. Stop it. Now.
May 5, 2014 at 8:47 pm
kavips
Yeah, right…(roll eyes again) Those that I insult, are not the dead, but those ridiculous Republicans who refuse to honor the dead by letting them rest in peace. You should know I honor the dead, especially those who die in service of our country. There is a deep and revered history to show it. My high esteem for them is far more righteous than that of John McCain, Lindsey Graham, or Darryl Issa, scum who don’t give a damn that 4 people died. They give only a damn about getting on TV….
If you haven’t figured that out yet… Why not? Until you do, stop criticizing us who deeply honor America’s fallen and are outraged that Republicans are using these brave souls only for political aggrandizement.
When THEY stop abusing the dead…. i’ll leave them alone. As of now, there is no difference between the filth of Darryl Issa and that of the Westboro Baptist Church. Both care only for their selves, with no regard to the hurt of others…Anything for publicity to put their face in front of a camera…
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, bemused2… Perhaps you are new to national politics and are one of the sheep, not aware of this….
But get your facts right before posting here.
May 6, 2014 at 10:05 am
kavips
Ahhh great timing. Here as well, is Jon Stewart’s rebuttal to your mock outrage.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/full-episodes/x5iu5f/may-5–2014—mariano-rivera
May 6, 2014 at 11:41 am
bemused2
OK, I’m back.
First off, the Washington _Post_ is reporting new news about White House e-mails that were released:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/04/29/benghazi-scandal-tied-to-white-house/
At the very least, we should ask about the “misleading talking points” used. If this White House will mislead here, what else are they misleading us on?
Just so you know, I am not a Republican, or shilling for any particular candidate — though I will say, if you are the quality of what Democrats are devolving to, I need to SERIOUSLY reconsider my party affiliation!
As to your opinions on who’s grieving about those 4 deaths, I didn’t mention anyone you have (Issa et al). If being arrogant and insulting, and citing Jon Stewart is your idea of convincing, you have failed. Democrats deserve better. We all deserve better.
And even worse, it’s not just about the 4 who have died. What could have been done to save those lives? How many more lives will be at risk because of such failed actions? You respond with short-term snark – but no wisdom.
May 6, 2014 at 11:44 am
kavips
Sigh, you just don’t learn… do you? You can talk all you want… but Jon Stewart nailed you, whether you know it or not… (that new talking point is covered btw)…
Whether you are a Republican or not, it doesn’t matter. You simply are not up to date on your information about Benghazi… It is obvious that you did not look at John Stewart’s outtake. You would not be here embarrassing yourself if you had…
No one can say what you just did, without the rest of us cracking up…. (Just so you know).
May 6, 2014 at 11:48 am
bemused2
Jon Stewart is an *entertainer*, not a government official or journalist. That’s not evidence.
Besides, if this is all a puffed-up hoax, why not have the WH answer all the questions, release all the e-mails, and be done with it?
I have no clue why you’re smirking about the issue. Since when did it become “embarrassing” to express concerns about our foreign policy and mourn the dead? And you’re calling *me* a “sheep”?
May 6, 2014 at 12:01 pm
kavips
Oh, my, you do have a steep learning curve ahead of you… Entertainers are the only ones who can tell the truth these days….. What would you call evidence? A statement by the NSA that they don’t accrue electronic data?
No one said it is a puffed up hoax.But puffed up is a good adjective to describe it…. It is like shrieking at the top of ones lungs in Times Square because another visitor there has a shoelace untied…. The amount of shrieking is going to draw attention, the person is going to try to defend himself, and the shrieker is going to try to keep the pressure on, … but in the end it is still a shoelace untied…
The real truth about Benghazi, which is outrageous, is that the funds to guard Benghazi were cut by Darrel Issa and the Republicans over Hillary Clinton’s objections. That is why there was no security in Benghazi. The Republicans cut the funding…
But we all know this…
But selectively we are now talking about some email where someone was bemusing the implications of mentioning the riots in context with the attack…
Really? Really? REALLY? When it was only because Republicans cut the funding that this event could ever have happened?
That is why anyone still outraged by Benghazi, is dirt. We know they are lying.
May 6, 2014 at 12:30 pm
kavips
I wasn’t going to answer the question as to why not have the White House answer, but changed my mind… I guess a better question would be why not have the guy in Times Square defend himself against his shoelace being untied? For one, on just a personal note, after answering the question 25,000 times, and still having the shrieker ignore all answers and continue demanding even more answers, one should just shut up…..
If anyone thinks people are not outraged because they are ignorant, then you simply have to ignore the tens of thousands of stories on this topic, the tens of hundreds of episodes on cable, network tv, and radio, the 13 full Congressional Hearings, the 50 plus Congressional meetings on this topic, the over 25,000 pages of documented evidence regarding this outcome,…..
it has been covered. There is nothing new there… Seriously watch Jon Stewart and come back… You are embarrassing yourself by commenting before you watch the episode… Your cause is the shallowest of all shallow causes….
Now let us for the benefit of all our readers… now dissect your statements… I have a few seconds here and it would be informative to all, I am sure…
Here are today’s statements stripped down….
Question: Why won’t the White House talk about this?
Question; If they won’t discuss this, what else are they hiding?
Personal Insult:
Question: What could have been done to save those lives?
Question How many more lives will be at risk because of this?
2nd response:
Question: Why not have White House answer and be done with it?
Question: When did it become embarrassing to question foreign policy?
Question: Am I calling you a sheep?
Notice. No responses.
The point of this demonstration is to prove to all those reading, how this argument works .. Like the guy in Times Square, the shrieker lashes out like a machine gun with questions? Unlike the shoe lace which all could see was untied, there is no visible evidence in this attempted scandal to point a finger.. Therefore all questions are not stated to get answers. They are to define the roles of the accuser and the accused. A power play of sorts. Evidence is meaningless to these accusers. We’;ve already gotten all the answers. 25,000 pages, 50 Congressional meetings and 13 full fledged Congressional hearings… but wait, wait, there has to be something more they question…
Duh… if you want something more… Go back and look at Iraq…. Duh….
But the only question I can answer, is the last one. Yes!, Whether you like or not, whether you know it or not, you are a sheep. You are being led. Try thinking for yourself for a change.
May 6, 2014 at 12:47 pm
bemused2
My, my… why all the insults from you? It seems you’re indulging in as much ‘ad hominem as you say I am (“thousands of inquiries”, “lashing out like a machine gun”,” etc. And I am baffled by your calling this a “Personal Insult”:
Personal Insult:
Question: What could have been done to save those lives?
Question How many more lives will be at risk because of this?
Concern number 1, is that the WH, despite hearings, may NOT have released “everything”. See what the group ‘Judicial Watch’ pulled out of them via the Freedom Of Information Act:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-benghazi-documents-point-white-house-misleading-talking-points/
“Judicial Watch announced today that on April 18, 2014, it obtained 41 new Benghazi-related State Department documents. They include a newly declassified email showing then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes and other Obama administration public relations officials attempting to orchestrate a campaign to “reinforce” President Obama and to portray the Benghazi consulate terrorist attack as being “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure of policy.” Other documents show that State Department officials initially described the incident as an “attack” and a possible kidnap attempt.”
That article has links to the actual PDFs obtained (some redacted), so you can see for yourself. I’m not convinced we “have all the answers” yet, if there’s more where that came from.
Concern number 2: the number of business and personal relationships between the gov’t and the press that affected the ‘spin’ on how the Benghazi story was reported:
You cited Jon Stewart as a news source — why not a REAL news source like CBS News? Oh, the president of CBS News is related to a high-level official in the White House at the time. Oh, ABC News’ Claire Shipman is related to WH spokesman Jay Carney, and so on. You’re telling me there isn’t even the POSSIBILITY of any conflicts of interest? Really?
Finally, I will repeat this again: your calling me “sheep” and flinging other such insults is not more likely to make me agree with you – it’s just pixels on a page. And to outsiders reading, they may indeed find this instructive, but not for the reasons that you think.
I’ve been a registered Democrat for many years — may be time to make a change.
May 6, 2014 at 1:07 pm
kavips
Your reading skills are not up to par. No one called you anything but a sheep.
The critique I gave was over your technique. That is clear for all to see. In the rational world, since I don’t know you, how can it be personal?
Likewise, what you inserted was not “your” personal insult. I left that blank and moved on to the questions. That alluded-to personal insult was the idle threat that “I am a Democrat but if you are one, I’m changing my party.”As an entity that defines the landscape of Delaware culture, I too have been tempted to make similar statements but have always refrained upon perusing the consequences. Simply put. in a world dominated by anonymity, no one believes what you say if you do say something like that… Which is why all conversation is so refreshing here.
Eventually the truth rises from the sewage and clarity is gleaned.
On this blog, personal insults are not allowed. But calling facts out is encouraged. It appears you have a thin skin. For the record, all i did was express how you came across… if that is not flattering to you, then, well, at least you know… 🙂 One never knows from where the next grain of wisdom will derive. That is why I keep things open…
I keep the meme of old high school chums sitting around arguing. All come back with different perspectives in life. In the end, they are still friends… What gets said is never personal, but is said in animated personal self-expression and must be taken in the nature of jest… The thrill of getting excited about topics and being vociferously competitive is simply for lack of a better word: fun.
Especially to those of us who love language…
May 6, 2014 at 1:26 pm
kavips
Btw. for brevity’s sake we are in agreement on the complicity of American media and their news sources…. no argument there.
I am simply not impressed with the Judicial Watch take… it is certainly not due to partisanship that they bring this up. They in fact were the party that pulled the map out of Dick Cheney’s top right hand desk drawer showing the west of Iraq divided up into, I believe, 8 territories to be bid upon by America’s oil companies two years before the invasion of iraq..
it was indeed a war for oil.
The writer of this Judicial Watch piece was on Rick Jensen’s WDEL yesterday…Again, his take was one of question, after question after question. The facts are that the email is about talk shows. Ever since Jimmy Carter, when honesty before the camera was proven not to be the way to win a second term, administrations have debated how to sell their policies to the American public… That is not lying. That is marketing. It has been done from Reagan since.
To try to fan flames on Benghazi again, over this email, is a stretch. That is my argument in a nutshell.
Yes, it happened. Does it matter now? No… Because if it mattered now, then worse should have mattered under George W Bush, Worse should have mattered under William Jefferson Clinton, Worse should have mattered under George H.W. Bush. Far worse should have mattered under Ronald Reagan..
Likewise It should have mattered under Eisenhower, when he boldly stated we did not fly spy planes over the Soviet Union, just days before they shot down Gary Powers…
Should we call them out on it? Yes. probably, of course, and then move on. But to create a crises where there is none, is the equivalent to yelling fire in a crowded theater… We all hate that..
.
May 6, 2014 at 2:59 pm
bemused2
We could get further into the weeds on this, but my sense is that we’ll just keep talking past each other. This *has* been educational, and perhaps a warning to other Democrats — shame on you if you don’t follow the approved talking points!
“Should we call them out on it? Yes. probably, of course, and then move on.”
Has that been done yet? I am not convinced that it has.
http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/05/03/former-cbs-reporter-sharyl-attkisson-ben