When Good Character No Longer Counts

Hillary2by Anniel10/20/15
It’s often the small things that are part of being a decent human being that show through the mask of a malignant narcissist attempting to pull the wool over your eyes.

Hillary Clinton will appear before Congressional Hearings on Benghazi this week, and no one expects any substantive revelations. At this point what difference does it really make to you and me? Other than watching a travesty of Justice and everything America stands for, there’s not much we can do.

Even Rush Limbaugh says little will happen, no revelations beyond “We weren’t certain if it was a terror attack or not.” The blame, of course, will still accrue to the insulting anti-Muslim video that nobody saw, and its hapless maker.

Anyone with their eyes and ears open knew immediately what happened in Benghazi. It was, after all, obviously planned to celebrate an important date in the history of the Arab world. After the first few news reports the meeting of the Turkish Ambassador with Chris Stevens and the grisly death of Stevens was common knowledge, as was the gun-running, Obama’s good night’s sleep, the refusal to send help, and the order to “stand down.”

The “small” revealing matters that no one will ask Queen Hillary about, concern the promises she and Obama both made to the grieving relatives of the dead when the bodies were returned to Dover AFB on 14 September 2012.

What sort of person promises to let a mother know how and why her son died, and then, when that mother has the audacity to ask the Queen for answers, put her and her questions aside as though she doesn’t exist and has no rights? In Hillary’s world Sean Smith’s mother doesn’t count for anything. It would take so little of her time and humanity to reach out for a few minutes and keep her promises.

Will no one ask a few simple questions at a Hearing or public forum: “Mrs. Clinton, have you kept your promise to the families of Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glenn Douherty to inform them of what happened that night in Benghazi? Has due care been given to any of them?”

The answer to those questions is, and has been from the beginning, “No.” Following in the President’s footsteps, she did not have the character and honesty to even pretend to care about the issue, or the people.

IT IS STILL BENGHAZI: OVER THREE YEARS LATER

Her supporters obviously support a woman of questionable character. • (1213 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to When Good Character No Longer Counts

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    Slick Hilly’s character isn’t at all questionable. We know the answer, and the answer isn’t pretty. Liberals are like that, because they place political expediency in the service of rigid ideology above everything else.

  2. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    We must never forget that the Hildabeest is all about self-aggrandizement. If she can get some wins in policies or actions which tend to destroy the USA, it is just icing on the cake.

  3. David Ray says:

    Contrast Saint Hillary’s response to the parents of the navy seals, with Bush’s to Cindy Sheehan (and all other parents of fallen warriors). Bush’s response had benign honesty, yet got rewarded with a celebrated nut-case.

    The parents of Woods had 10 fold cause for angry bombast than Sheehan ever did, but they had honor and an indifferent press. (As we all predicted, the MSM lost interest in Cindy after Bush left office.)

    • Anniel says:

      Some poor souls learn the hard way that they can be a “useful idiot” for only so long. At least Sheehan wasn’t jettisoned as Stalin would have done it.

  4. Anniel says:

    I admit to a certain fixation on this matter. Every time I hear the parents speak out on this, I get upset that promises were publicly made without care or thought. Treating these people with respect is such a simple matter, and our betters can’t be bothered.

    None of us really count in Obama’s world, nor in Hillary’s.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      One of the many dirty little secrets of liberalism is that, for all their self-proclaimed altruism, they’re really rather selfish (and their only group loyalty is to their fellow liberal elites). Partly this is because, as we’ve noted many times here, they’re too busy caring about The People to care about people.

      • Anniel says:

        Timothy, My heart breaks for Mrs. Smith every time she speaks out.
        I hope she has good people around her.

        • David Ray says:

          She does as her son had good people next to him.
          The reason they lost their lives is because they had poor back-up. (After all, it was past Barry’s bed time and had a fund raiser next morning.)

    • Rosalys says:

      I admit to a certain fixation on this matter.”

      I admit to a few fixations of my own. The whole Benghazi Affair – from start, to finish, and beyond – from top to bottom, and inside out – is so entirely horrific, almost to the point of unbelievability! That our government, our leaders would refuse protection – Nay! Actively deny and forbid help! – to American diplomats, is, is… I want to say outrageous, but it seems too mild. So awful, so evil, so horrendous is this, that I’m afraid the word doesn’t exist which properly describes this event and its aftermath.

      These people are our “leaders.” So tell me, what is the one thing necessary for someone to have in order to be called a leader? He has to have followers! So what does that make “us?” I renounce these “leaders” of ours. I want no part of their vile, stinking garbage!

      America’s problems are spiritual. Anyone who cannot see Satan’s ugliness all over this is thoroughly enveloped in darkness! America needs to repent.

      And what about that poor slob who made that stupid video? I understand he was tossed into jail, and still languishing therein a year later. Anybody know what’s going on with him?

      • Timothy Lane says:

        He was released, and I haven’t heard anything further about him. As for the evil of what happened there, Benghazi (note that in Arabic, a ghazi is a holy warrior, cf. the “murderous ghazis” in A Study in Scarlet) is a combination of several scandals. There was the failure to provide additional security when Ambassador Stevens asked for it, the failure to send assistance, the dishonest blaming of the attack on a video instead of a planned outrage (and that constant harping on the video may well have encouraged the later embassy attacks elsewhere), and finally the jailing of the video-maker as a scapegoat.

        And that doesn’t even take into account the liberal desire to use the video as an excuse to attack free expression.

  5. Steve Lancaster says:

    We all know the excuses that the administration uses, “not enough time, no assets in the area, its just a riot etc.” Even if these were true, they are not, but even so. Less than two hours flight time is a competent trained ally who would have made the problem their own. Does anyone doubt that Israel would have assisted in anyway possible to help out? Hostage rescue is an IDF speciality and could have been on the ground in Benghazi in four hours or less with enough force to have saved all four.

    Not asking for this assistance is Obamas failure as CinC. It is his hubris that killed these men and I hold him directly responsible.

  6. Anniel says:

    I tried to follow some of this morning’s hearing but found myself developing a severe case of dyspepsia at the sound of the lies from Hillary’s mouth. Some of the questioners were very good, which is heartening. Then I turned over to Rush talking about Ryan as Speaker of the house and became so disgusted with Ryan and our so-called representatives I started biting my fingernails. What do we do about the sham that is Washington D.C. and its inhabitants?

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Apparently Ryan was willing to give the Freedom Caucus a lot of what they want. In the end, someone has to be Speaker, and it didn’t seem that anyone else could be chosen — and Boehner was going to stay Speaker until someone replaced him. I can think of many better choices politically (and Dan Webster, who has a less conservative voting record, probably isn’t it), but most of them are too junior to be serious candidates. The key is getting someone who is capable of communicating with the public, and willing to do so. Ryan, who has been easily elected and re-elected in a swing district, may be it. And at least before 2017, we probably won’t see an attempt at amnesty. Maybe then we can find a better choice.

      An article at Five Thirty Eight discussed why Ryan is a better choice for conservatives than Boehner or McCarthy (not a high bar, admittedly). One point is that Ryan is not only more conservative than them, but also less of an establishment shill (in fact, his voting record in that respect actually would fit in with the Freedom Caucus). The link is:

      http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/what-paul-ryan-has-that-kevin-mccarthy-and-john-boehner-dont/

      • Anniel says:

        Thanks Timothy, I’ll try to keep an open mind, but I seriously feel like putting my fingers in my ears and tuning them all out. We do have to keep fighting and I know we can’t get all we want, but I’m sick of the drama and choreography going on continually.

        That’s why I’m listening to Mozart. At least the music is honest.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          I’m not thrilled with Ryan, either. But you can’t beat someone with no one, and that’s effectively what we have otherwise. There is reason to believe he’s at least better than the other “mainstream” or “establishment” choices.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            My biggest concern with Ryan is his open borders/amnesty beliefs. Anyone who works with that nut job from the Chicago political machine, Luis Gutierrez, on immigration reform cannot be trusted.

            As I have said many times, immigration is the overriding issue facing our country. We will lose all other fights if the country is flooded by more immigrants.

  7. Anniel says:

    Today is December 11, 2015, and this week Queen Hillary denied that she had ever blamed Benghazi on a “disgusting video” and had never said such a thing to the families of the Benghazi victims. Never, not once. I guess the poor schlub who went to jail over it was just that, a poor schlub whose life has no relevance in the rarefied atmosphere where Hillary lives. And calling the Benghazi family members liars is so charming.

    Hillary’s “new” campaign slogan is “Love Trumps Hate.” She claims to have espoused this her whole life. Character really does not count in her world. Satisfy the powers that be and throw the real citizens to the wolves, or the jihadists, whichever comes first.

    • Rosalys says:

      Not only is she evil beyond belief – she is stupid beyond belief. What she said and did is all over the internet and a 2 second search will reveal it. I guess she thinks that the evidence will be scrubbed away the way her email server was. To late for that dumbbell! Way too late!

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Now that she’s the presumptive Democrat nominee, she counts on the synoptic media to cover for her as they have for Slick Barry. So they will, but not at the total sacrifice of their credibility — and they don’t control everything (which is why liberals hate talk radio, Fox news, and any other information source they don’t control).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *