Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
By the way, Hillary did an interview in Peru (why there?) and took "responsibility" for the failure to respond to the potential threat of violence against the emabassy in Libya. But then she cleverly buried that same "responsibility" into the thousands of people who work for her, suggesting it was a screw up by someone in that big pile of thousands of people who answer to her. I didn't hear the whole interview, but I'm pretty sure she didn't say "And by golly, I'll get to the bottom of this and find out who screwed up if it's the last thing I do!"
Apparently it's in her job description to deflect criticism of the president whenever she's asked to, this time by absorbing that criticism and then passing it along down the chain of command until it can made to stick to one of her underlings. The Clintons, both of them, used tactics like this during Bill Clintons tenure as president. They didn't just fire someone in the White House travel agency, they intentionally lied about him and tarnished his reputation, and for no other reason than to give themselves a reason for firing him.