Liberals wonder why Benghazi scandal persists despite election being over
http://twitter.com/#!/joshtpm/status/269938055970971648
It was just over a month ago when Obama deputy campaign manager and lying liar Stephanie Cutter got the ball rolling, declaring that the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Libya was only an issue because Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan insisted on politicizing it — a claim that seems even more outrageous in light of the “French kiss” of a third presidential debate.
Confronted yesterday with a question about Benghazi, Democratic Party Communications Director Brad Woodhouse replied by tweeting simply, “We won.” And yet the hearings continue, even though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday smacked down the proposal of a Senate select committee. His reasoning? “The elections are over; it is time to put aside the partisan politicization of national security.”
This time it’s Josh Marshall’s turn to ask: Why won’t you wingnuts on the right just let it go? (Marshall is publisher of Talking Points Memo, which provides special snowflake Soledad O’Brien with her crib notes.)
Finding out the truth behind Benghazi isn’t going to change the election results, so why cling bitterly to that “tragedy”? Marshall asked, and conservatives answered.
@joshtpm MURDERED. AMBASSADOR. Hope that helps.
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) November 17, 2012
@joshtpm You really think the guy who was tortured for 5 years by the North Vietnamese doesn’t care about the safety of Americans overseas?
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) November 17, 2012
All caps will DEFINITELY make it a scandal. RT @jtlol: @joshtpm MURDERED. AMBASSADOR. Hope that helps.
— Scott Galupo (@ScottGalupo) November 17, 2012
@scottgalupo @joshtpm No, its scandalous nature makes it a scandal. That’s why you’re panicking.
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) November 17, 2012
Panicking? Well, even the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd in her Sunday column calls out Amb. Susan Rice for “renting her soul” in order to advance in the administration.
@scottgalupo and saying “the election is over” makes moot everything that happened the first Monday in November or earlier? @jtlol @joshtpm
— Victor Morton (@vjmfilms) November 17, 2012
@scottgalupo and to be fair, liberals never HAVE considered attacks on embassies to be that big a deal #NotLikeItsAnActOfWar @jtlol @joshtpm
— Victor Morton (@vjmfilms) November 17, 2012
@vjmfilms Of course not. Just don’t there’s a there there when it comes to Benghazi.
— Scott Galupo (@ScottGalupo) November 17, 2012
So, wouldn’t a thorough investigation put to rest the idea that there is something there? Those who managed to pay attention to the election and the developments in Libya can name quite a few things to investigate, actually.
Actually, RWs think Benghazi is a scandal for several reasons – some laid out in this piece, pre-election. bit.ly/VIQYSX @joshtpm
— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) November 17, 2012
@scottgalupo there’s malfeasance beforehand, public lying about acts of war for domestic politics, jailing an American in pursuit therein,
— Victor Morton (@vjmfilms) November 17, 2012
@scottgalupo another round of feckless apologies, and now liberal commentators like Marshall showing their allegiance to leftism uber alles
— Victor Morton (@vjmfilms) November 17, 2012
@vjmfilms Someone or two should be fired for lax security. Public lying is theoretical at best.
— Scott Galupo (@ScottGalupo) November 17, 2012
@scottgalupo Susan Rice repeatedly lied at admin’s behest. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama repeatedly misled public for weeks.
— Victor Morton (@vjmfilms) November 17, 2012
Conversely, with the election over and Obama seemingly in office for another four years without challenge, what possible harm could come from asking questions if there really is no there there? Wouldn’t it be satisfying to shut down all those scandal-minded conspiracy theorists on the right by proving them to be just that?
In fact, Media Matters seems to think that Obama’s just getting more popular despite Fox News’ insistence on covering the story.
paging Fox News….#Benghazi; MT @gallupnews Obama’s current 58% favorable rating is his best in over 3 years gallup.com
— Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) November 16, 2012
We know a lot of people are suffering from election fatigue, but forgive us if we’d like some straight answers once and for all.
“Look, Benghazi was only a scandal because Obama lied about the death of an ambassador to win an election. Now the election’s over, idiots!”
— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) November 17, 2012
Lefties, pre-election: “You only care about Benghazi ’cause you want Obama to lose!” Lefties, post-election: “The election’s over, shut up!”
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) November 17, 2012
Newsflash lefties: I cared about Benghazi because four Americans were murdered. Stop projecting your politicizing nature.
— Melissa Clouthier (@MelissaTweets) November 17, 2012
Nope, that’s not it. It’s just sour grapes.
#Benghazi is RW hysteria ginned up by embarrassing #Republicans who cannot admit they just took a shelaquing in the election. #tlot
— Jeff P McColly (@Bow2kaos) November 18, 2012
#Benghazi #Libya is a Republican witch hunt based on their hatred of President Obama and their fury that he was fairly reelected. #p2 #tcot
— Maliheh (@Maliheh_) November 18, 2012
Comments are closed.