I love how Jackson’s excuse is that he thinks his religion tells him to hate people, as if that somehow makes it okay. Cuccinelli is just as bad though. He’s the guy that wanted to ban oral and anal sex as a crime against nature. I don’t see how it helps Republicans to support him while rejecting Jackson.

Silencing people is the opposite of progress. Instead everyone needs to hear their opinions, and why they are wrong.

While mister E.W.’s views are, well, ew. He is only the the lieutenant nominee. The Virginia GOP candidate for governor is Ken Cuccinelli. He is a serious nutbag and the one we should all be keeping an eye on.

Obviously he is saying that Obama hates the separation of church and state, wants the subjugation of women and non-believers, wants to ban abortion and contraception, wants global war to spread his ideology, etc. Whoops, who was I talking about again?

What I think they mean is that Gnocchi is a dumpling, not a pasta. But it would really depend on the shape of your gnocchi. If they are more ball shaped then calling it a dumpling would be accurate, but if they are flattened more then they might be called a pasta instead. Not that there is any sort of clear dividing line so call them whatever you want.

Dear gods old and new, from Cthulhu to the IPU, please oh please let this be true.

Bitter much? LOL.

You’re welcome, I’m glad to help. Maybe I’ll post more later about his ethical lapses, mishandling the F&F investigation, general disdain for the working class, etc. But for the moment, I’m really ill and it’s sapping my ability to focus.

I hope they try that. It worked great last time.

Gohmert, it deserves to be challenged. Despite what you think, blowing a booger and then catching it on your tongue isn’t a character building exercise.

The cover was Photoshopped, you can tell by the pixels.

I don’t like Holder much, but Issa is disgusting. I hope he keeps dancing his little dance for us. Issa is one of the congressmen that voted to cut funding for security at embassies, and wants everyone else to take responsibility for it. During the investigation he exposed Libyans working with the US, including a female human rights worker, to danger by failing to redact names from a document dump. And working with his partner in derp, Representative Jason Chaffetz, he helped expose classified information about the presence of a CIA facility in Benghazi. Issa made it clear before he attained chair of the Oversight Committee that he planned on using it to attack the Obama administration. He has made good on that promise by playing political games with his position. That includes strange rule changes and investigations that he knew would go nowhere saying “It’ll be good theater”. Foreshadowing his later claims about Benghazi and an obvious case of wishful thinking, he said the Sestak “scandal” could be Obama’s Watergate and called it a crime. Then, so very mysteriously, declined to investigate. He also canceled a hearing on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission because it could have harmed Republicans more than Democrats. And he has had a remarkable level of hypocrisy about openness. And page after page could be written about his mishandling of the Fast and Furious investigation. But so much has already been said about that I won’t bother. Use google. In summary, Issa is scum.

I agree. They should continue investigate conservative groups. There are plenty of slimy characters and questionable actions that need examination. But there are plenty of liberal groups that need investigating too. The IRS needs to do their job right, not abuse their power and then use it as an excuse to shirk their responsibilities.

Finally, the faintest glimmer of awareness that rushing to judgement is blowing up in their faces. Congress, please investigate this. But don’t expect us to be too impressed if you decide to play political games with it.

Not every floor is going to be more dirty than every door handle, but in general they are. Door handles are usually made out of metal and often polished by the action hands touching them repeatedly. There aren’t many places for a bacterium to hide. Floors are often made of porous materials such as ceramic, wood, etc. There are more pores for the bacteria to take refuge in. Also usually there are more particles of dirt on the floor. On and in these particles is an especially convenient place for bacteria to hide. Swab your door handle and swab your floor and then culture each in agar, if you really want to know if this holds true for your particular door knobs and floor surfaces.

That’s an interesting contention on your part. Where did I say the evidence of Republican mishandling is meant to be exculpatory? Let me clear this up since you seemed to miss my last comment about it. I don’t support the editing of the talking points. I find it disgusting, frankly. Sadly, I expected from the moment I heard about Benghazi that any statements from the Obama administration, or any other politician, would be opaque and edited for best political effect. I find anyone that expected otherwise to be staggeringly naive. I’m not the least bit sad that this blew up in the administration’s face. To answer your question from two posts ago if I was fine with the buck stopping in the oval office, yes it’s perfectly okay with me. I’d be fine with this ending Clinton’s political career too. I have no emotional attachment to this administration whatsoever. So if you guys have some kind of evidence of a real crime then please present it already. What I don’t support is an expensive congressional fishing expedition to turn up evidence of what the majority of us already knew from the very beginning. What I want is for people to take responsibility. Democrats and Republicans are both responsible for the security situation in Benghazi before the attack. Both Democrats and Republicans have been misleading the American public about Benghazi since day 1. And nether side is talking about the real changes that need to happen so that our diplomatic missions are better protected against attack. Our government has a fundamental inability to protect our diplomatic missions. That some people would ignore the issue and instead focus solely on the least important parts is offensive, IMO. The September 11 attacks mark the 3rd time the embassy in Sana’a has come under attack (not to mention the repeated attacks on other diplomatic locations). So what do these politicians propose that will help protect it from the next attack and make the state department more responsive to evolving security needs? Oh right, nobody gives a shit. *sigh*

Notice my relentless on-point pushback? Notice my partisan mindset, and shiny new Audi R8? That’s right! I’m Shill Man, here to pave the day! Actually I’m not really a partisan and I don’t get paid for posting. But if any political operatives are watching: I could really use the money, lol. Don’t worry, I can play devil’s advocate for whatever side you are on.

1) Susan Rice got those talking points from the CIA. You know, the agency responsible for gathering foreign intelligence and whose installation was attacked when the consul was attacked. 2) That man was a criminal and his video resulted in attacks on diplomatic facilities in Cairo and Sama’a. I suppose you expect me to feel sorry for him? 3) The Whistleblower Protection Act is designed to protect witnesses of government misconduct. It does not protect subjective opinions.

So you have changed your mind. You aren’t so much interested in the “Actual handling of Benghazi”, as you are in the messaging and actions of democrats after the attack. But for a supposed non-partisan to focus on that and ignore that Republican messaging has also misled the American public and mismanaged the investigation, is quite frankly puzzling. I will explain, if you were unaware: Republicans have repeatedly said that it was obvious there was a growing problem with al-Qaeda in Libya before the attacks. For example, Senator Lindsey Graham said on Fox: “But I wish [Obama had] give some attention in Benghazi, Libya, when it would have mattered. There was an al Qaeda storm brewing for months.” This is the same Senator Graham that accompanied Senator McCain on a trip to Libya before the attacks where the latter stated: “We are very happy to be back here in Libya and to note the enormous progress and changes made in the past few months.” They could have raised the issue then but instead praised Libya’s progress. I’m sure Graham and McCain have 20/20 hindsight, too bad they are using it to mislead people. Greg Hicks said: “I think everybody in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning”. Hicks, who was stationed in Tripoli, not Benghazi, and his colleagues must have had more information than the CIA whose annex was breached in the attack. The CIA still thought that the attacks were spontaneous when they issued the talking points on the 14th. Notice the mention of the “open source study” in those talking points? That is referring to the Open Source Center. Another OSC report includes a briefing by the Libyan interior minister in which he thought the attacks were the result of the video. Not to mention all the news agencies, foreign and local, that thought the Benghazi attacks were part of the Cairo and Sana’a protests. Hicks is misleading us if he expects us to believe that everyone knew it was terrorism. The Republican handling of the Benghazi investigation has resulted in breaches of classified information that potentially put lives in danger. Darrell Issa released a cache of sensitive documents without redacting names of Libyans working with the US, including that of a female human rights activist, putting them in danger. Darrell Issa and his colleague Jason Chaffetz worked, ineptly, in concert to accidentally reveal the presence of a CIA annex at the consulate compound. Derp. Republican commentators and blogs have misled the public about what happened to Ambassador Stevens after the attack. For example Hannity, citing a video, claimed that Stevens’ body was dragged through the streets, and others have embellished the story further to claim torture and rape. Except that the video is actually of people trying to take him to the hospital. Lastly we get to Republicans misleading the Americans with hyperbole about Benghazi. They have repeatedly blown the magnitude and significance of the attacks out of proportion. Senator Inhofe, among others, has called the attacks and the reputed coverup worse than Watergate and Iran-Contra. So the Benghazi affair is worse than the time that Nixon, seeking papers President Johnson had compiled about Nixon’s sabotage of the 1968 Vietnamese peace talks to boost his campaign, broke into the offices of his political opponents and then used his executive power to try and cover it up and squash the investigation? Sure buddy. It’s also worse than that time that Reagan sold weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages and then funneled that money to violent central American extremists? Uh okay, lol. Then there is the Republican strategist that claimed that Benghazi is much worse than 9/11. W…T…F, he really thinks that? I’m sure I don’t have to point out any further hyperbole, like how Republicans are calling for Obama’s impeachment over this after having called for impeachment at least 15 other times for violations such as passing legislation or simply existing, as my point should be clear by now. Furthermore you haven’t tried to dispute the obvious truth that Republicans had politicized the Benghazi attack mere hours after it had happened. I’ll take your further silence as a confirmation that you admit it is true.

Republicans ARE IN POWER. If you deny that they have had zero effect on the “Actual handling of Benghazi” then let me supply you with an example: The state department had requested additional funds for diplomatic security. The funding was instead cut by some of the same congressmen that are now pressing the investigation into these security failures. So why were they playing politics with money that was needed to protect Americans and could have potentially changed the outcome of these attacks? Should we hold them responsible for their poor choices with regards to diplomatic security? What I see are two powerful political parties playing dirty politics. Both have handled this in the worst way possible. Democrats by trying to limit the damage it could do to their political campaign. And Republicans by trying to find blame in their political opponents for the actions of foreign terrorists. What, IMO, we should really discuss is what sort of structural changes can be made within the state department to prevent future attacks. There have been a significant number of attacks on US diplomatic missions under every president since Reagan. I’m not interested in blame for those past attacks anymore than I am interested in blame for this attack. Who is to blame for these attacks (extremist morons, duh) is quite frankly the least interesting question we could be asking right now. What I want to know is what we can do to prevent these sort of attacks in the future. So why hasn’t the media and congress spent the past 8 months hammering on that issue? Why are they so interested only in the partisan aspects? Oops, red herring. lol.