The right’s new hero

TMW2014-05-14color

Did you notice how when the GOP’s favorite rancher and Tea Party terrorist, Cliven Bundy, got in touch with his inner racist, Benghazi all of a sudden became the urgent Fox News/Republican talking point? That and new criticism of Hillary Clinton?

Karl Rove suggested at a conference Thursday that Hillary Clinton suffered a “traumatic brain injury,” according to the New York Post’s Page Six.

“Thirty days in the hospital? And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury?” Rove told the audience, as quoted by the Post. “We need to know what’s up with that.”

The Post reported that Rove repeated the claim several times at the conference, where he was speaking alongside former Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs and CBS correspondent Dan Raviv. He urged Republicans to continue pressing for answers about the Benghazi attacks and said voters deserve to know about the former secretary of state’s health issues if she decides to run for president, according to the Post.

The scumbaggery never ceases to amaze. (You know, of course, that the New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who, coincidence of coincidences, owns Fox News.)

The absence of scandal

Paul Krugman, who is always right, issues an apology:

When Barack Obama was elected, I was sure that it would be the Clinton years all over — that he would be subjected to an endless series of claims of “scandal”, creating the sense of a tainted administration even though all the alleged scandals would turn out to be either trivial or nonexistent. Remember, after all those years of front-page headlines and $70 million in public funds, the Whitewater investigation came up dry.

In fact, however, none of that happened during Obama’s first term. But would the second term be different? For a little while it looked as if the old scandal machinery was finally springing back to life, with Benghazi, the IRS, and more. You could almost hear the sigh of contentment from a certain part of the press corps.

But now it has all evaporated. Benghazi never made sense; it turns out that the IRS was targeting conservative as well as liberal groups. And as Chait says in the linked article, the NSA stuff is a policy dispute, not the kind of scandal the right wing wants.

Of course, the absence of any fire behind the smoke didn’t stop the Clinton witch hunts. But this time seems to be different. Maybe the news media have actually learned something; maybe they’re effectively disciplined, this time around, by the blogosphere. Anyway, the narrative of a scandal-ridden presidency seems to be evaporating as we speak.

So I was wrong. And I’m glad I was.

It isn’t that the Republicans are trying to make up scandals that aren’t there. It’s that no one believes what they say anymore. Take a look at the links at the bottom of this post.  The GOP is making itself irrelevant.

Democrats are being spineless weasels again

Republicans faked Benghazi e-mails to make the Obama administration look bad. But Democrats aren’t going on the attack. What’s their problem? One commenter at TPM says this:

The Democratic Party at the national level looks to Obama and his White House for everything. His Cabinet members (Defense apart) have no policy autonomy; Democratic Senators and Congressmen loyal to the President are also dependent on him and his team for everything from legislative initiatives to daily talking points. The closest thing to Democratic voices independent of the Obama White House are former (and future) campaign consultants on the talk shows.

Obama has chosen not to push back hard against doctored Benghazi leaks that even the tame broadcast media objected to. So no Democrats in Washington is either. Hostility to the opposition, as an organizing principle, is much more deeply established in the Republican Party. This is why real and imagined Democratic scandals inspire so much more indignation (real and pretend) among GOP officials in DC.

This is going to be a continuing problem for national Democrats as Obama’s second term proceeds. It may be a chronic problem until they have a Clinton campaign and White House to tell them what to do, say and think.

They just don’t seem to understand that if they don’t fight back, the GOP is going to kill them.

 

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi: The GOP cartoon

That’s Robert Gates, the secretary of defense in the Bush administration, calling the GOP interpretation of how Benghazi should have been dealt with “cartoonish.”

And here’s the lead animator of the cartoon, Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, who’s presiding over the investigation.

You can take off on a commercial flight from Washington, D.C. and almost be in Benghazi in seven hours? Uh, no.

was2benghaziSo either Issa is stupid because 27 hours is way longer than seven hours, or Issa is lying. But he’s on Fox News. So do you expect Fox News to challenge a stupid, lying Republican?

Let’s make this simple. This is what Benghazi is about (from Daily Kos):

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) conference opening session in Dublin December 6, 2012. REUTERS/Cathal McNaughton (IRELAND - Tags: POLITICS)

So the GOP is running against Clinton, and if it manages to have the Obama administration distracted on this issue, that’s a two-fer.

Don’t imagine the Republicans actually care about what happened to the victims of Benghazi. If they had, they would have increased funding for embassy security before the assault happened. They voted against it.

Stupid is as stupid does: the Rand Paul edition

Hillary Clinton went before Congress today to answer questions about the Sept. 11, 2011, attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans were killed.

Benghazi has been a GOP wet dream, because the party and its Fox News propaganda outlet have been declaring it the worst U.S. tragedy since Osama bin Laden‘s Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the U.S.

Really that’s what they’re saying. Just ask Kentucky’s junior senator and senior Tea Bagger, Rand Paul:

“I’m glad that you’re accepting responsibility,” said Paul. “I think ultimately with your leaving that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that.”

Those are the words that actually came out of his mouth at the Clinton hearing today.

And that’s why he’s an idiot.

Because if he doesn’t think the mass shooting at a grade school in Newtown, Conn., was worse.

Because if he doesn’t think the mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., was worse.

Because if he doesn’t think the mass shooting at a Tucson “meet-your-congresswoman” rally was worse.

Because if he doesn’t think the total loss of an American city during Hurricane Katrina was worse.

Because if he doesn’t think the lies his party told that got us into a war against a country that had nothing to do with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S. were worse.

Then he’s incapable of rational thought, and everyone who put him in the Senate should be personally humiliated.