I want you to listen again to this rant, but this time more carefully

Really, after the NYT study released a few days ago, the right still needs their Benghazi binky? Too cute!

@DrJohn: I can’t help but wonder Dr John, why is it that so many on the left are construed as untrustworthy, deceiving, manipulative, destructive, dangerous, etc until they say something that compliments your agenda and suddenly, they’re credible?

The IPAB has been haggled extensively. It is designed to help hold down costs in Medicare, subject to Congressional approval, and to reduce the influence of “special interests” on Medicare payment policy which is most likely the culprit of the inaccurate characterization. The IPAB cannot rationalize medicine or make individual decisions for patients as proclaimed by the Romney/Ryan campaign and endorsed by right wing news sources and blogs.

@DrJohn:

It wasn’t a study, it was an attempt at whitewash and it has been discredited. Only fools would believe that the Times turned on its time machine over a year later and sent a reporter to Benghazi during the attack.

There were other Americans on the ground in Benghazi that night. Americans who were required to sign a “confidentiality” agreement and have no been allowed to testify to Congress. CIA Americans. Now we are being told by the NYSlimes that they had a reporter on the ground that night. Someone who actually watched the whole thing. That leads to the question; who is the reporter? Did the times hire a jihadist to participate in the attack, or at least report back to the Slimes during the attack?

No attack, not even a “spontaneous” one, is without leaders. And those “leaders” would have been known to our people there. Yet, a year later, the Obama administration is still looking for the perps.

On the one hand Clinton said that it didn’t matter what caused it but then asserts that it’s necessary to learn what caused it.

Don’t kid yourself, Dr. John; the administration knew what and who caused it, They knew just as soon as those CIA agents that were on the ground that night were debriefed. What they don’t want the nation to know is what is already known; our State Department was facilitating the running Fast and Furious style, into Syria via Turkey. We are arming our enemies, and that is the big deep dark secret Hillary Clinton was sworn to hold.

But a change is in the wind, Dr. John. Can you feel it? Have you seen it the last few months? And for all the protestations of the Administration about phony scandals and trying to hide the garbage under the rug, those winds will continue to blow. And like the winds of Katrina, the hand of The Won will not be able to hold it back.

This is classic Clintonism- take your query, stop it, seize it, take control of it and turn it around and escape the noose of responsibility.

It is also classic Ailinsky.
If you all recall Bill’s FIRST campaign for president Hillary’s paper on Ailinsky was exposed.
She is one of the masters of all of his techniques.
And, to the extent we study his techniques as well, we can neuter her.

@Ronald J. Ward: Selling death panels? To say you are ignorant is down playing your statement. Let me enlighten you. Was refered to an Oncologist for Kidney stones. He stated he would like to give me Prostate exam, but FEDERAL REGULATIONS prohibited him. I asked him what we could do. He stated I had to expressly ask for it. Long story short, he found something he didn’t like. Did biopsy and found cancer, but with the early finding, it was easily cured. Now lets say that he didn’t have the decency to tell me and I walked out of there thinking I was healthy. All this to try and save money by bureaucrats not allowing life saving exams.

@DrJohn: The Charles Koch founded and funded CATO Institute? A Libertarian, government hating think tank with a “survival of the fittest” mentality? That’s your source to defend what was dubbed “the lie of the year” of 2012? Kochs by the way has spent more than $50 million fighting ACA.

By your logic and the logic of the koolaid induced, death panels will kill your grandma because Sen Grassley said so, euthanize your Down Syndrome babies per Sarah Palin, and haul sick and elderly in front of a board who after hearing their case, will then convene to determine their fate because, well, Betsy McCaughey wouldn’t have said it if it weren’t true?

You are regurgitating a debunked talking point and using incredibly flawed and biased anti-ACA highly funded resources to back it up.

“Death Panels” is pretty much akin the the birther tactic. Regardless of how many times the myths are exposed, the right wing will continue to bring it back up. Honesty plays no role and as Rick Perry admitted of the birther issue “it’s a good thing to keep alive”. And indeed from a political perspective, it is as it continues to remind people that Obama came from a mixed family, that he has Kenyan and Muslim background, that he’s black, and well, he just isn’t like us. Likewise, this death panel nonsense is no more than debunked lies that’s good fear mongering to keep alive.

But from a political perspective, fear mongering, lies,and distortion (and the big bucks of the wealthy to keep that propaganda machine purring) is really all today’s GOP has left and the only tools they can use in the 2016 election. And that is precisely why they need to keep the Benghazi hyped up nothingburger alive.

@This one: Then I wonder why, This one, after the video excuse was exposed as never having had been mentioned as a possibility for the cause of the attack, the administration backed off and tried to explain the widespread use of that excuse as simply “the best information they had at that time”? Further, they tried to convince us that Obama called it a terror attack from the beginning (referring to his Rose Garden general statement about fighting terror).

The classic give-away when detecting a lie is when the liar keeps changing their story or forgetting what lies they had already told. It seems you and the NYT have slipped on this banana peel.

@Ronald J. Ward: You can certainly rest assured that conservatives are not going to let Hillary gain office while getting away with her dereliction of duty which caused these four deaths and national embarrassment. It’s bad enough she wasn’t fired; to have her in charge of the nation after such an abject failure of duty would be a travesty.

Remember her criticism of Obama being that he wasn’t prepared to receive that phone call at 4 am? That was based on a presumption that she was; as it turned out, in this very episode, neither one was up to the task and both have lied their way out of the responsibility.

There is but one way to clear their names (and it is NOT relying on the NYT to do an honest report). Stop stonewalling the investigations and hearings, release all witnesses to testify and stop punishing the whistle-blowers. A cover up implies someone covering something up. Demand answers, stop defending liars.

@DrJohn: Let’s take a look at the actual law.

IPAB “shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues
or Medicare beneficiary premiums…, increase Medicare beneficiary cost sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria.”

@DrJohn: Are you still selling the birther issue as well? Just wondering.

The histrionics RJW is exhibiting here in continuing his frenzied attempts at defending the ultimate fail that is obamacare makes for pretty good schadenfreude.

Mr. Ward, quoting the law allegeding that the IPAB is prohibited from rationing care might have some relevance if the Obama admin was prone to actually following laws. Given the fact that no legislative action has ever approved the politically expedient delay of the employer mandate, nor the multiple bandaid fix attempts by Obama “asking” insurers to deem people insured even if they haven’t actually paid a premium, as well as “asking” insurers to reissue cancelled policies to individuals – when those policies do not meet obamacare law mandate coverage requirements….there is no reason to trust anything the left says about what the obamacare law says.

Additionally, due to the attention Palin rightly brought to the IPAB, and the subsequent well deserved negative implications obamacare will enact on medical care, HHS has played the shell game of changing tbe name of the IPAB to some other dry acronym. Do you really think that the same jerks who repeatedly lied to tbe American people that obamacare was not a tax – then argued in court that obamacare WAS a tax in order to pass constitutional review- can be relied upon not to ration care?

It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

Huh? It is?

That was the point of the hearings.

That should have been the point of the hearings. Unfortunately, the Benghazi hearings became little more than an effort by republicans to convince the public that an almost criminal level of negligence existed, and to then pin that to their political enemies.

Any truth that did not serve that political end has been disregarded; any misconception that did serve it has been encouraged.

This is a measure of the level of partisan dysfunction that presently exists in America. Achieving political ends has been elevated above discovering truth and furthering the common good.

I posted this because I want you to pay close attention to what Hillary says and how she says it so, you know, you’re not bamboozled again. It’s going to be very important. We don’t need another four years of liberal disaster.

She only fools the brain atrophied libs. She’s never fooled me. I’ve never voted for her. As long as there are enough BAL (brain atrophied libs) she will have voters.

@Greg: The hearings turned into a guessing game because the administration would not cooperate, for reasons that have been all too obvious. Now, the NYT comes out with an article wishing everyone would conveniently forget that the administration had already replaced their initial lie, the video, and moved on.

Always, the cover-up is worse than the infraction. This just keeps getting more embarrassing for the liars that expect people to believe their tales.

@Greg: 29

by republicans to convince the public that an almost criminal level of negligence existed,

ALMOST? convince? It was to expose the lies and the lying liars that were lying. It did. Didn’t you see how frustrated she got when she couldn’t wiggle out of it.

@Bill, #33:

The assertion that the video was relevant has never been a lie. The fact that it was relevant should be obvious. The posting of the video in Arabic a week earlier triggered a prolonged series of demonstrations at U.S. embassy sites all across the Muslim world, several of which became violent and resulted in deaths. The video wasn’t the only reason. It was only one of a number of factors that all came together to culminate in the Benghazi tragedy.

I’m still having trouble understanding how anyone could seriously deny the dangerous potential of a video specifically designed to insult and incite extremist Muslim elements, when we had already seen violent reactions to lesser provocations on so many previous occasions. Have people forgotten all the times that has happened? Do they think that suddenly such things no longer mattered to extremists?

This is like not blaming someone for throwing a match into a storeroom filled with gunpowder, when his main defense is that the gunpowder was just sitting there, waiting to be lit.

@Ronald J. Ward:

What the hell are you talking about?

The definition of birther, I thought I made that clear. BAL? Birther is a Hillary follower that thinks Obama was not born in Hawaii. If you are not a Hillary follower, you can’t be a birther. That was not ‘made up on the fly’ it is a fact.

@Redteam: Yes you made it clear but what hat did you pull that out of? It’s among the stupider (and yes, that’s actually a word albeit seldom used) things I’ve heard on here. When, where, or how did Hillary enter the picture of one believing or not believing that Obama was born in the USA?

You made clear what you said but what you said doesn’t make sense.

@Greg:

The assertion that the video was relevant has never been a lie.

Despite the NY Times effort to absolve Hillary Clinton of Benghazi, there really is no evidence that the video had any role in the Benghazi attack.

We’re supposed to believe that it was just a band of mischief makers who happened to be in the area, armed with RPG’s and mortars, the skills to use them with deadly accuracy, someone to guide the “protest”, who were wrought with grief over the video and spontaneously decided to attack the consulate where Chris Stevens just happened to be instead of being in Tripoli.

Apply DrJohn’s Law. It will serve you well.

@Greg:

That should have been the point of the hearings.

How many of those injured have testified? Obama promised to get the bottom of this, so you know he has no intention of doing so.

@drjohn:

Have you stopped molesting little boys, Ronald?

I mistook you as one with an iota of integrity. Obviously, my bad.

I guess that’s your way of saying you won the argument?