The assumption there is that what goes on in public is all that's going on. In my observation over several administrations, more gets done via back channels and staffers' legwork while the Big Guy (whoever he is) is off making speeches. YMMV.
Thank you! If the gub'mint was smart (big if) they would use all the information to develope a plan to keep this from happening again, or at least minimizing the damage/fatalities.
I don't like Obama, but he can't be everywhere pleasing everybody. I would rather he make a speech about jobs (directly affects Americans) than pontificate and embarrass himself talking about things he can't really do shit about. Do agree though that he shouldn't have said shit about Trayvon but he does have to appeal to fan base, so what can you do? In the end Zim was still acquitted so his opinion didn't mean shit anyway, nor should any Presidents' opinions.
I want Freeman as president - so he can give his inaguration speech breathing helium! That's some funny shit right there.
And if you don't think several acres of trees are being demolished right this minute to generate a bunch of 1,000-page reports on How to Avoid Another Benghazi, you don't know how government works. Thing is (and as someone who's been in the sandbox, you know this), Shit Happens. There's no way to rule out every possible contingency in these situations. Best case, you do your best to prevent American casualties, but you can't foresee everything.
Sadly developing a contingency and getting everyone to adhere to it is a different thing. Or like you said shit happens. Reality will trump theory every-fucking-time. Some people don't believe how FUBAR things were for me in the early days of 2003 Iraq - virtually nothing went as the "theory" stated they "should." Even military folks play the "that's not how it's supposed to be" game but those are REMF anyway so who cares?
Looks like it's not over after all. Clinton aides scrubbed Benghazi files before review, former official says http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/15/clinton-had-benghazi-files-scrubbed-review-former-/
It's over. The politicians and pundits dredging it up now are only doing it for the ideologues who already agree with them. For everyone else, it stopped being an issue ages ago.
Benghazi IS going to finish Obama! Sarah Palin IS going to be vice president! Fred Thompson IS going to be president! Mommy and daddy ARE going to get back together! Spot IS going to find his way back home from that stupid farm! It's all going to happen! You just shut up! Stupid....HEAD!
English as a second language? 'Cause "You're" is the proper contraction of "You are", which is what I meant to say. That you apparently think otherwise proves you're as much a moron as Feeble Farmboy is.
Actually, Chuck is pretty awesome. If I had to wager a guess, I don't think it was your grammar he was pointing out (which was correct, BTW).
Either way, he's wrong, because the form was correct, and Federal Farmer is a moron, so the message was directed at the appropriate target. There's really nothing else in the message I posted, so no other cause for objection.
No, you're both pompous gasbags who refuse to admit to being wrong about anything to the point that when someone is just giving you a ribbing over grammar in a post you're attempting to bash someone's intelligence, you just act butthurt over it and can't even have a laugh at the irony of it.
Why would I admit to being wrong, when I'm not? I did use the right form ("you're" for "you are"). I'm not even a tiny bit butthurt over Chuck getting it wrong, but amused as Hell that he did so while mistakenly trying to correct me, when there was nothing to correct. Bashing his intelligence over it is having a laugh at the irony of it.
You're right about your use of "you're," I guess I saw it quoted and emphasized and assumed he was correcting you in an ironic fashion. Of course you're still a pompous gasbag.