5 ms·

Yeah, I hate that circular logic. Americans drink more coke than pepsi, look at the advertising budgets. You hammer something on prime time every night for 6

by jbooth 13y ago

Yeah, I hate that circular logic. Americans drink more coke than pepsi, look at the advertising budgets. You hammer something on prime time every night for 6 months and people will think it's a bigger deal than the story you don't. There's not an actual scandal behind Benghazi. Literally none. They're alleging a cover-up, "of what?", "they're covering it up!". That's the whole story and somehow it's 6 months of airtime. The IRS story is just bad CYA by the administrators there. Political groups applying for charity status is in fact something that the IRS should be auditing and cracking down on, regardless of political party, and there were a lot of tea party groups applying for charity status -- The dept head was actually a Bush appointee, they just weren't tactful enough about how they set their filters to make it look more bipartisan. This leak case, on the other hand, is actual erosion of press freedoms. And the media (?!?!?!!) seem to care the least about it.

shardling 13y ago
Well, the New Yorker has been printing exactly your stance on this, so at least some elements of the media care. :)
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
spinchange 13y ago
Without asserting criminality, the Benghazi affair was entirely deserving of serious inquiry and investigation but regrettably we such have such immature and partisan Government that the opposition party chose to make it a completely farcical political spectacle. So much that, it is easier for reasonable people to assume there's nothing to any of it other than political attacks when in fact there clearly was some kind of bureaucratic ineptitude and they were officially blaming a YouTube video for weeks.
Nrsolis 13y ago
I'm not sure if I agree with you about Benghazi. Brandon Webb and the guys over at SOFREP have been doing a fair bit of reporting on the subject. tl;dr: Benghazi was a colossal screwup and exposed how JSOC operations in the area put State Department people at risk.
- jbooth 13y ago
  Obviously, if people died, then someone screwed up bad. But the "scandal" hasn't been about who screwed up. It's been about whether Obama used the word terrorism enough times in the aftermath, and nebulous accusations of "cover-up" with no actual allegations of wrongdoing that's being covered up. It's pathetic.
  - hga 13y ago
    That part of the scandal is about Team Obama blaming this on the Emmanuel Goldstein du jore, who's still in jail. Otherwise you have to accept the Administration's narrative that Arab mobs routinely bring RPGs and mortars to their protests of insults to their religion.
cinquemb 13y ago
Maybe it is because the media has traditionally been at the end of the strings of the State[0], so to be surprised about such actions seems kinda naive. Some people probably stopped taking orders… But it is interesting/amusing to see the State encroaching upon itself and its own devices in the pursuit of terrorism or whatever thing we're supposed to be fighting these days. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinion#Use_of_mass_media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinio...
hga 13y ago
Lying to everyone about Benghazi to maintain a narrative about terrorism prior to the election satisfies most people's definition of a scandal. And for some reason the people on the ground, even in the country, were told to stand down rather than attempt to help, something that no one can remember ever happening before. Really now, this is the first Ambassador killed in the line of duty in 33 years (previously under Carter, of course) and you're sure there's nothing suspect about it?!??!!! Your claims about the IRS abuse completely fail, since no "progressive" organizations suffered such abuse. One group even resubmitted their application, just changing the name to include the word Green and sound progressive, and it sailed through the process. And stonewalling != investigation, many groups were delayed for 3+ years, two election cycles, and are still left hanging. Compare to many many other examples, like Obama's Organizing for America -> Organizing for Action 501(c)(4). You may have no problems with the heavy hand of the government suppressing those you politically oppose, but I assure you the other side does, and as I note elsewhere in this subthread this sort of thing has grave consequences.
- jbooth 13y ago
  If it were just about my political preferences, I'd be thrilled that conservatives can't shut up about Benghazi. It didn't play during the last election, it won't play during the next one, and makes Republicans look like frothing at the mouth idiots. But I'm actually concerned as an American about real issues, even real criticisms of Obama that get no attention while this idiocy goes on.
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  And this is why they say to keep politics off of HN. None of your assertions are backed up by fact. It's really disheartening to see this nonsense here.
  - hga 13y ago
    In other words, you have no basis to deny my words, so you want them banned on this forum.

by jbooth 13y ago

shardling 13y ago

Well, the New Yorker has been printing exactly your stance on this, so at least some elements of the media care. :)

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

spinchange 13y ago

Without asserting criminality, the Benghazi affair was entirely deserving of serious inquiry and investigation but regrettably we such have such immature and partisan Government that the opposition party chose to make it a completely farcical political spectacle. So much that, it is easier for reasonable people to assume there's nothing to any of it other than political attacks when in fact there clearly was some kind of bureaucratic ineptitude and they were officially blaming a YouTube video for weeks.

Nrsolis 13y ago

I'm not sure if I agree with you about Benghazi. Brandon Webb and the guys over at SOFREP have been doing a fair bit of reporting on the subject. tl;dr: Benghazi was a colossal screwup and exposed how JSOC operations in the area put State Department people at risk.

jbooth 13y ago
Obviously, if people died, then someone screwed up bad. But the "scandal" hasn't been about who screwed up. It's been about whether Obama used the word terrorism enough times in the aftermath, and nebulous accusations of "cover-up" with no actual allegations of wrongdoing that's being covered up. It's pathetic.
- hga 13y ago
  That part of the scandal is about Team Obama blaming this on the Emmanuel Goldstein du jore, who's still in jail. Otherwise you have to accept the Administration's narrative that Arab mobs routinely bring RPGs and mortars to their protests of insults to their religion.

cinquemb 13y ago

Maybe it is because the media has traditionally been at the end of the strings of the State[0], so to be surprised about such actions seems kinda naive. Some people probably stopped taking orders… But it is interesting/amusing to see the State encroaching upon itself and its own devices in the pursuit of terrorism or whatever thing we're supposed to be fighting these days. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinion#Use_of_mass_media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinio...

hga 13y ago

Lying to everyone about Benghazi to maintain a narrative about terrorism prior to the election satisfies most people's definition of a scandal. And for some reason the people on the ground, even in the country, were told to stand down rather than attempt to help, something that no one can remember ever happening before. Really now, this is the first Ambassador killed in the line of duty in 33 years (previously under Carter, of course) and you're sure there's nothing suspect about it?!??!!! Your claims about the IRS abuse completely fail, since no "progressive" organizations suffered such abuse. One group even resubmitted their application, just changing the name to include the word Green and sound progressive, and it sailed through the process. And stonewalling != investigation, many groups were delayed for 3+ years, two election cycles, and are still left hanging. Compare to many many other examples, like Obama's Organizing for America -> Organizing for Action 501(c)(4). You may have no problems with the heavy hand of the government suppressing those you politically oppose, but I assure you the other side does, and as I note elsewhere in this subthread this sort of thing has grave consequences.

jbooth 13y ago
If it were just about my political preferences, I'd be thrilled that conservatives can't shut up about Benghazi. It didn't play during the last election, it won't play during the next one, and makes Republicans look like frothing at the mouth idiots. But I'm actually concerned as an American about real issues, even real criticisms of Obama that get no attention while this idiocy goes on.
hackinthebochs 13y ago
And this is why they say to keep politics off of HN. None of your assertions are backed up by fact. It's really disheartening to see this nonsense here.
- hga 13y ago
  In other words, you have no basis to deny my words, so you want them banned on this forum.