January 25, 2013

Hillary: What difference does it make?

Asked and answered, sweetie.

 

RAMclr-012513-hillary-IBD-C.jpg

h/t geoff B

Posted by Jeff G. @ 1:20pm
41 comments | Trackback

Comments (41)

  1. LBascom says January 25, 2013 at 1:43 pm

    I still can’t believe a grown up answered that way. I mean, a six year old has more self awareness than that. Walk in on them coloring on the walls, they know better than to say “it doesn’t matter if the wall isn’t a coloring book ‘cuz we have to clean up the mess”. Like that would get them out of trouble.

    Of course, such a strategy might work on other six year olds, so she is probably safe.

  2. sdferr says January 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm

    If the grown up intended precisely the opposite of “what difference” in the sense of “I will determine the difference, and not you“, would Mrs. Sec. Clinton’s statement take on another coloration altogether?

  3. cranky-d says January 25, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    When people turn over their decisions to the state, they become like children, even in situations such that they must make decisions themselves.

  4. LBascom says January 25, 2013 at 2:05 pm

    in the sense of “I will determine the difference, and not you

    Thing is, she DID determine the difference, and that it mattered to the extent she vigorously and persistently pushed a film as the difference, to the point of having the film maker thrown in prison.

    If it didn’t make any difference, as she claims now, why did they put so much time and effort into establishing that difference?

  5. sdferr says January 25, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    The question Mrs. Sec. Clinton advances is a rhetorical rebuke of Sen. Johnson, is all. She hasn’t any doubt of the differences distinguishing the various components of the entire Benghazi affair, least of all who holds the reigns of power, and hence who can push what demogogic pretense when and with what effect. They Won! Forward!

  6. sdferr says January 25, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    oof, my apologies: reins is more appropriate in that expression, though reign is clearly limping along in the background.

  7. Matt says January 25, 2013 at 2:32 pm

    What was amazing to me (and it shouldn’t have been, I guess) but that the Republicans did not bring (or at least be aware of) any rebuttal evidence. Everything that was said by this administration about the video as the culprit should have been referenced. I mean, they know HIllary is going to lie her gigantic ass off. So while I appreciated that the Repubs asked the question, only an idiot would not be prepared to respond and ask follow up questions. And 3/4 of these guys are lawyers. Embarassing.

  8. Gulermo says January 25, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    “would Mrs. Sec. Clinton’s statement take on another coloration altogether?”

    Why yes, yes it would. Shut up, that’s why.

  9. beemoe says January 25, 2013 at 2:39 pm

    Hell, Johnson wasn’t smart enough to point out the inconsistency in her answer.

    She immediately contradicted herself when she said what was important was making sure we don’t let this kind of thing happen again. How are you going to do that if you don’t know what the fuck happened in the first place.

  11. Gulermo says January 25, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    “if you don’t know what the fuck happened in the first place.”

    If anyone on this planet knows what happened she does. It’s her job to know. If she truly doesn’t know, then what does that tell you wrt her job performance. She doesn’t believe you have the right to know, that’s all.

    Because, shut up, she said.

  12. charlesaustin says January 25, 2013 at 2:56 pm

    I prefer the congitive dissonance of “Our job is to find out what happened and why it happened,” followed by “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Although a close second is not being responsible because she didn’t see the cables. Do you think her staff was afraid to show them to her, merely incompetent, or realized the importance of giving her plausible deniability. I sure hope every CEO is allowed to claim this defense when prosecuted over Dodd-Frank.

  13. leigh says January 25, 2013 at 3:03 pm

    She did say that the buck stops with her under secretary, not her.

    Personally, I say she’s lying.

  14. Gulermo says January 25, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    “Personally, I say she’s lying.”

    Lie or the truth. Tomatoe, Tomahtoe, you know.

    “I say she’s lying.” How can you tell?

  15. leigh says January 25, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    I can tell she’s lying because her lips were moving.

  16. beemoe says January 25, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    The truly horrifying thing is she is being replaced by someone orders of magnitude times worse.

  17. leigh says January 25, 2013 at 3:36 pm

    True that, BMoe.

  18. charlesaustin says January 25, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    The conspiratorial part of me thinks the establishment Republicans were more than happy to let Rand Paul be considered rough and beyond the pale with his questions and comments.

  19. Gulermo says January 25, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    “establishment Republicans”

    Bulls with tits. There’s your problem, rite, rite, rite, c’here.

  20. leigh says January 25, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    I heart Rand Paul.

  21. beemoe says January 25, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    Using the phrase “beyond the pale” with regards to today’s GOP conjures up so many unflattering puns and images I am at a loss which way to go.

  22. cranky-d says January 25, 2013 at 4:28 pm

    As in, “A paler shade of white?”

  23. 11B40 says January 25, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    Greetings:

    Bumps in the graveyard.

  24. geoffb says January 25, 2013 at 5:04 pm

    A couple of comments from elsewhere.

    Bob Bec[k]el on FNC’s The Five tonight gave the best explanation yet for “What difference does it make?”

    He said it means, “We got away with it. We knew it was going to be a close election. So we made up the video excuse. And it worked.”’

    They know that by binding the media to the crime, by making them overt co-conspirators, they are protected against future criticism. That was the point of the Journolist. For the same reason the KGB would not accept treason for free. You had to take the silver so they knew you were unable to turn on them.

  26. Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:09 pm

    I still can’t believe a grown up answered that way.

    I still can’t believe (while concurrently being completely unsurprised) that the media saw it as a smackdown of the GOP. They’ve gone well beyond beyond cheerleading, and they’re ensuring that ugliness is coming.

  27. Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:11 pm

    Uh oh. I’m thinking like Ace? Disturbing.

  28. Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    Although a close second is not being responsible because she didn’t see the cables. Do you think her staff was afraid to show them to her, merely incompetent, or realized the importance of giving her plausible deniability.

    Those cables were undoubtedly incorporated to some degree into the PDB, which Obama doesn’t bother taking because he can just read it and doesn’t need to talk to the people who create it because he’s just so goddamned smart. And he probably didn’t read it at all because he was busy watching ESPN.

    Remember when the PDB was the most important thing ever and stupid George Bush let thousands of Americans die because he didn’t figure out that he should shut down the airline industry because OBL and airplanes were mentioned in one of them?

    Were Orwell here, I suppose he’d be saying “You’re fucking kidding me, right?”

  29. Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:21 pm

    Oh, and remember how Bush took the briefing live every day because he wasn’t as smart as Obama?

    We deserve collapse. We’ve earned it. Liberty is dead and we killed it.

  30. newrouter says January 25, 2013 at 6:33 pm

    Now there was something (WHI) mentioned that might have been missed by most of your readers. It touched on something the media has hinted at, but behind the scenes has a lot of us scrambling to prepare for and that is Barack Obama’s campaign machine being kept in place and even strengthened to not only be used as powerful political leverage for the 2014 midterms and then during and after the 2016 election, but well beyond that time frame as well. I think the phrase was “community organizing on a global scale”. I will confirm that (WHI) is 100% correct about that. It’s called Organizing for Action and it’s actually bypassing the traditional DNC and its goal, if what I’m told is correct, is to raise hundreds of millions of dollars and utilize “issue bombing” to exert tremendous pressure on politicians to vote as Barack Obama/Valerie Jarrett would want them to vote or face further damaging public relations courtesy of the Organizing for Action machine. This also means the current Obama team thinks they are capable of choosing Obama’s 2016 successor and make no mistake, that also means then that the same agenda that has so many of us frustrated and fearful now will NOT stop after 2016. It really will be the total globalization of the Obama presidency. He will extend his influence well beyond just eight years in the White House. Now let that sink in. The possible ramifications of that scenario should scare the heck out of all of us who already recognize just how bad things are going now.

    link

  31. palaeomerus says January 25, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    “Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:11 pm
    Uh oh. I’m thinking like Ace? Disturbing.”

    Meh. This seeing he light and then running away from it is a periodic thing with him. Ace is just at the peak of his “they’re right I need to toughen up” sinusoidal pattern. But don’t worry, he’ll get ‘embarrassed’ by something some right winger does and he’ll begin his decent back towards the trough of grass roots hating, smart party, political expert, shades of grey compromising, compromising, speech auditing Rove-ish-ness again. Probably within three weeks.

  32. palaeomerus says January 25, 2013 at 10:08 pm

    palaeomerus says January 25, 2013 at 10:05 pm
    “Pablo says January 25, 2013 at 6:11 pm
    Uh oh. I’m thinking like Ace? Disturbing.”

    Meh. This ‘seeing the light and then running away from it’ thing is a periodic event with him. Ace is just at the peak of his “they’re right I need to toughen up” sinusoidal pattern.

    But don’t worry, he’ll get ‘embarrassed’ by something some right winger does and he’ll begin his descent back towards the trough of grass roots hating, smart party, political expert, shades of grey compromising, right-speech-auditing Rove-ish-ness again.

    Probably within the next three weeks. If we lose the gun ban fight he’ll start talking about how guns are a losing issue for the GOP or some shit and start pontificating on how we need to rethink it as an issue.

  33. happyfeet says January 25, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    what Mr. Ace says he says very well in this instance

    if I were grading his paper I would give him an A+++ and also put a smiling banana scratch n sniff sticker on it

  34. palaeomerus says January 25, 2013 at 10:17 pm

    Yeah and he’ll be on the way to the other side in three weeks or so. His vows are traced in sand.

  35. happyfeet says January 25, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    well maybe but he has a lot of responsibility, running such a big popular blog n all

  36. happyfeet says January 25, 2013 at 10:21 pm

    Burt Reynolds is in the hospital he could die

  37. happyfeet says January 25, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    the goddamn cnn propaganda sluts are already running his obituary

  38. happyfeet says January 25, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    don’t click that it’s dirty

  39. batboy says January 26, 2013 at 1:10 am

    The Won has been re-elected. So, right now, it makes no difference.

    In four years, when Hillary! is running for the Presidency, it will make even less difference.

    These are Democrats, people! Members of the party of theft, treason, infanticide, and sodomy!

  40. Ouroboros says January 26, 2013 at 8:54 am

    I wish my old grampa, G-d rest his soul, had been there to answer Hilly’s rhetorical question.. I remember saying something similar to him years ago… To which he responded, “Go ahead… Sass me again you little shit.” ..Then went on to strip off his leather belt and wear my ass out.. I think that’s what Hilly needed. A good tuning up.

  41. Merovign says January 26, 2013 at 4:26 pm

    So, no answer as to why they left the consulate staff to be killed in the first place?

    Hillary Clinton wasn’t a member of the administration answering the questions of representatives, she was a member of a criminal gang asking them what they could to to stop her.

    We are literally watching a representative government fail.

Leave a Reply