The Real Reason Behind The Republican Benghazi Investigations

darrell-issaNow that John Boehner and a few other Republican politicians have come to the realization that (after over 50 attempts to repeal) Obamacare isn’t going anywhere, we’re back to Benghazi once again. Good old Benghazi, the fallback red meat for Republicans everywhere. Never mind that many people can’t find it on a map, let alone know that it isn’t the capital of Libya, or that the attack was on a consulate and not a heavily guarded embassy – out come the pitchforks because they’re absolutely terrified of Hillary in 2016.

Yes, we get it. Four Americans died and after reading the report (which I guarantee 99% of people haven’t), it’s pretty obvious that this was a tragic event – just like all the other times our diplomats have been attacked, that could have possibly been avoided. Beirut 1983, anybody? 241 dead Marines with unloaded weapons? Reagan? No? Moving on…

But why Benghazi? Why call another special committee to investigate when absolutely nothing significant was found when the Senate Committee investigated? Why subpoena the current Secretary of State who wasn’t even in office at the time to testify instead of allowing him to do his job trying to quell conflicts around the world? Because as the saying goes, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

Let’s not forget this is an election year and all of the ads bashing the president, the Affordable Care Act, and anyone who voted for it just aren’t working as well as the GOP would hope. The horror stories of people losing their insurance or paying triple what they did before are being debunked about as fast as they can spin a new one, and even some conservatives are grudgingly admitting that the system isn’t perfect but still better than before.

So back to Benghazi the House Republicans go again, and it’s because Benghazi is the only thing they have in their nearly empty bag of fake scandals and outrages. All of those talking points about President Obama destroying the economy as part of his socialist, communist, fascist Muslim agenda? The jobless rate continues to march downward and the stock market is near an all time high. Remember how Obamacare was supposed to have death panels that would send your grandparents to the ovens because they were no longer able to work?  Turns out that was a big, fat lie and only the most unhinged people on the far right still believe that.

Now, the GOP could certainly find legitimate points to criticize the president on, but they simply don’t have any viable alternatives to present, and complex economic or diplomatic policy issues go way over the head of most voters. So again, Benghazi. Why? Because in a jingoistic, Walmart patriotism voting bloc with an elementary school level understanding of foreign policy, it works. Benghazi isn’t a place in which they live or a thing that they can touch and experience. Unlike healthcare reform, it hasn’t done anything to them and while they almost certainly couldn’t find it on a map, all they know is some terrorists killed some Americans there – and they’re pissed off about that.

Republicans could talk about how the jobs in this economic recovery aren’t as good as the ones before, but then they’d have to eventually admit their intimate relationship with the corporations that have shipped our jobs overseas. They could make an issue of the fact that these jobs aren’t paying very well, but then the uncomfortable fact that Wall Street is doing so well might just disprove the trickle-down economic scam the GOP has been selling them for all of these years. So again, Benghazi. Because it’s an easy sell, and it’s all that they have left.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Devon Lewis Adrian

    You’ve got it absolutely right…I figured that they would use this anyway, but maybe this will turn out to be a good thing. Hopefully there will be a good dose of “Benghazi fatigue” well before 2016.

  • mike

    Until republicans realize that attacks don’t win national elections they’ll lose and lose again.

    • WellhungHippie

      It’s only worked once to my knowledge and that was 33 years ago – beating up Jimmy Carter with the Iran hostage crisis.

  • lindylou

    They got nothing.

  • scott

    I have a few questions? If it were your son or daughter that was killed in benghazi and you were told that it was because of a video and the secretary of state said “what difference does it make?” Would you be so dismissive? Or how about if your son or daughter was killed by a weapon that the government supplied to known criminals again would you be so dismissive? Believe me I am not republican but I am not a democrat either but what I am is an independent. I am independant in my thinking as well as my research and voting. I do not believe what either side says, the right is just as far right as the left is left. I do feel that we are the governments employers and have an unquestionable right to the full truth which we have not been getting from either side of the aisle.I also would love to live in the perfect world but realize this will never happen as there are people that feel that they should have more than the rest of the world. So I am for everyone protecting themselves with fire arms. Cops cannot do it, you have to do it yourselves.

    • joey mcc

      There were 13 Benghazis that occurred under Bush’s watch. You never heard anything about them because the left generally doesn’t try to politicize tragic events and because Fox News never mentioned them once. However, 1 attack under Obama, and all you hear is BENGHAZI!!! The list of attacks is below if you actually care enough to learn.

      January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

      June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

      October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.

      February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

      May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

      July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

      December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

      March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name “David Foy.” This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what’s considered American soil.)

      September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

      January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

      March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

      July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

      September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had beenmarried for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

      • Bryan

        Thank you for taking the time to educate those of us who didn’t know about all those attacks. Good form!

      • Matthew Reece

        None of those incidents involved the death of a US ambassador. Moral of the story: how many people die is less important to statists than who dies.

    • RHOmea

      Sadly, this site blocks any comments that contain a URL Scott as I was posting some detailed information from the WSJ and others which precisely shows WHY neither Ms Rice nor Ms Clinton were **allowed** to discuss details of what happened in Benghazi: the US mission there was a CIA black-op outpost wrapped in diplomatic clothing. It’s a fact that there were nearly 4 times more CIA agents than actual US Foreign Service diplomats. There are strong indications that the CIA was holding Libyan hostages at some point, and proof that the US gov’t was handling the transfer of arms from Libya to Syrian rebel forces via Turkey.

      When the CIA is involved and the “National Security” SILENCE light goes on – even the Sec of State can not tell the truth… don’t believe me? just ask Colin Powell about those WMD’s and his comedy routine at the UN. ‘-)

      So if anyone would like to find these very well documented articles by real news organisations that are filled with valid research (that is being ignored in the ISSA hearings) google “wall street journal Benghazi CIA” AND “business insider Benghazi CIA’

  • RHOmea

    Astoundingly,
    the author writes SEVEN paragraphs and does not even hint at the THREE
    words that are “The Real Reason Behind the Republican Benghazi
    Investigations” – the three words that strike primal fear into every Republican across the nation:
    President Hillary Clinton.