Tag Archives: secretary Clinton

Hubris

(A re-post from 052813 in light of a renewed effort by the current Administration to accuse us of creating “PHONY SCANDALS”.)

 

Like a small flash it hit me after reading this quote from a DNC fundraising email:

“They’ve (Republicans) been caught red-handed making up so-called ‘scandals’ out of thin air to stir up false rumors of vast ‘cover-ups’ happening in the White House,”  Full story here.

First, let’s address the substance of this statement by listing what must be “made up out of thin air”…

This is what really happened, AKA the Truth, according to the DNC:

A U.S. Diplomat and three security personnel, two of whom did not fly to the rescue by stealing an airplane, were not killed on Sept. 11, 2012 by Al Qaeda militants.

The State Department, for some inexplicable reason, did not blame the event on a you tube video that 19 people viewed prior to the non-existent attack by random folks living in Benghazi.

The Administration did not register the 11 other Benghazi victims under pseudonym’s when they were admitted to various hospitals for the injuries they did not receive during the non-attack.

The Internal Revenue Service did not admit targeting Conservative groups, who are perceived by the current Administration as opposition, for additional scrutiny.

One of those running things at the IRS did not plead the fifth in order to not incriminate herself.

The Department of Justice did not secure the phone records for 100 Associated Press reporters, which did not include ancillary business and personal phone numbers.

The Department of Justice did not secure months of e-mail, which included addresses for his contacts, from a FOX News reporter without his knowledge or agreement.

These ridiculous non-facts are just more of the same from the Republican Party…. stop reading here and send the Democrat National Committee your money now.

Or, keep reading a little longer.

The small flash I mentioned earlier was a word…  Hubris.

Hubris /ˈhjuːbrɪs/, also hybris, from ancient Greek ὕβρις, means extreme pride or arrogance. Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power.  Full definition here.

Taking a short trip down memory lane, I recall the second year of President Obama’s first term.  At the beginning of that year he was being roundly criticized for appearing on television with unfettered frequency never before matched by any sitting president.  By the end of that year his party had lost the control of the House to the Republicans.  This happened to the dismay of those who predicted victory based on the turnout from his huge 6-point win 24-months prior.

I remember his demeanor being one of shock… for several months he seemed sullen and in a state of disbelief given such results.  I’m not sure he’s been quite the same since.

But, Barack Obama genuinely believed his victory over one of the oldest, “whitest”, most “war-mongering”, least Republican candidates in 2008 was not because he was a young, articulate, African-American… he believed it was because he had a mandate for his Socialist Ideas.  He actually thought the voters were listening to the meaning of his words… not just enjoying the beat, and hopped up on the desire to feel like their lives mean something… historic.

If you take a moment and slip on his size 12’s, you could understand this.  It’s undeniable, He spelled out his plan in “Blue Print for America”, his books, his speeches and with the people he surrounded himself with.  He was not keeping his Socialist values a secret… just ask Joe the Plumber.  Frankly, just ask any of us who were screaming at the top of our lungs exactly because we DID read his Blue Print, speeches and books.

President Barack Obama believed, and still believes, that the masses agree with him.  To him, The Ends of Social Justice… being Equality of Outcome with Government at the Center of every Solution… is justified by the Means of having the U.S. kneel before the world while using Government Force to destroy any Opposition to the Socialist Utopia.

I suggest the reason we are seeing all of these “non-existent” scandals come to light is a brilliant by-product of our founding Fathers Constitutional design.  This type of malfeasance will always surface in a transitional government.  When individuals within ones own party are interested in securing power for themselves, and your time is up… as mandated by law, anything you’ve been doing is up for review.  When I say anything, I mean trampling on the First, Second and Fourth Amendments.  It has to scream for Pepto-Bismol when the Benghazi Whistleblowers are all Democrats… who then are testifying that we (the U.S.) could have sent assistance which might have resulted in saving the lives… of a Democrat Ambassador and his Democrat security personnel.

It also has to cause his ulcer to bleed when his fellow Democrats join the chorus of those demanding investigations of the IRS for political targeting.

Finally, he and his Administration must be suffering from Elitist Arrogance when they start using the Countries Security Services to investigate the Press for doing their job… well, at least when the Press are doing the part of their job which the Administration finds disagreeable.  The Press… the one ally the Leftists count on.  The enablers of government vice.  (The press giving any oxygen to this is unbelievable.  Talk about biting the hand that feeds you…)

I will state again, nothing is going to cause this President to be Impeached.  It will not happen.  And he knows it.

I don’t care if Congress finds out this Administration was selling missiles to Syrian Rebels associated with Al Qaeda.  I don’t care if they find out the IRS was coordinating their efforts to oppress Conservative Opposition with the FBI, DHS and OSHA.  I don’t care if they find out transcripts exist of the AP reporters personal calls to their spouses, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc. which are being passed around DOJ for laughs.  And, I don’t care if we discover that help was truly available to be sent to Benghazi but was told to stand down because it might appear to be too “American”, or as the Leftists put it too “Militaristic”, which we also find out was the same reason they were there without the appropriate security in the first place.  I don’t even care if they find out the President is sleeping with Valerie Jarret and Susan Rice, at the same time, then lied about it under oath in order to escape a sexual harassment lawsuit based on law he directly championed.

Only an extremely over blown sense of competency, arrogance and undeserved righteousness could fuel such behavior.

However, none of this matters.  We have 3 1/2 more years of this guy and his Fellow Travelers.  That’s just the way it is.

But that doesn’t mean we have to sit by and watch them destroy what little of the Constitution and Bill of Rights which remain intact.

Get ready for the mid-terms.  (Update 112014… we won.  but it might not be enough if we still have no spine.)

It’s possible they believe there are no scandals… Hubris would explain that too.

If you make sh*t up, then write it down… and read it, you might just begin to believe it.  Such is the way of the Leftist.


When in Trouble, Blame Congress.

If you’re a Secretary of State, and you know your answers will not play well… with anyone. You can always blame Congress.
The line from Secretary Clinton is that Congress killed Ambassador Stephens and the men trying to come to his aid by denying “funds” for State Dept. expenditures.

While this is a “too clever by half” approach to handling a Congressional Inquiry… it’s the other missing half that matters.

Did Congress embargo the truth? In other words, was it Congress that was responsible for the State Department making up inane reasons for the “spontaneous attack” that occurred in Benghazi and then feeding it to the American People?

Was it Congress that hung our Ambassador out to be killed? In other words, if the excuse now being offered is that Congress was not giving enough taxpayer dollars to the State Department to defend our Diplomats… then why was the State Department putting them in harm’s way? If the State Department doesn’t have enough money to defend our diplomats why are you sending them there?  Could Ambassador Stephens been loaned your security detail Madame Secretary?  Could we have sent one of the myriad Armed Defense Department Drones actively flying five minutes away to aid in the defense against this ultimately successful 9/11 assassination attempt?  Is it not an indictment of the Secretary of State that she was sending our “best and brightest” into places where she could not guarantee their safety?

“I never saw security requests for Benghazi.” – Secretary Clinton.  Then Congressional funding is not relevant.

So which is it?

The attempt to blame Congress for this is juvenile. Nothing about the Benghazi attack was unprecedented, nor unexpected. The complex had been repeatedly attacked over recent months leading up to the September 11th debacle.

If there is nothing to fear here, and the lack of security was not by design to show how “nice” we are… then release the e-mail exchanges surrounding this matter in their entirety without redaction.

Bad people do bad things. I’m willing to focus my ire upon the Terrorist A-holes that committed the act, but I will not ignore the apparent fact we put people in harm’s way and left them there to die.

We left them there to die.

As I sit here and watch this live, is there really any part of this… any version of events, yours or anyone else’s, that merits laughter?  Even a smirk… the smirk you are currently wearing?  Is there something funny about this that we are missing?

You left them there to die.

Mrs. Clinton?