In response to Mr. Folz, who was “unhappy with the election results.” He attempts to concoct a rationale to justify his opinion with faulty facts using Benghazi as some kind of huge gotcha moment.
First, David H. Petraeus testified that intelligence reports revealed that the assault on the diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration refrained from saying the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates to avoid tipping off the groups. Rice’s Sept. 16 assessment of the Benghazi attack matched CIA and DNI analysis. The entire attack took approximately six hours; certainly not enough time in which to put in place a response team. There were two facilities used by the Americans in Benghazi, the American mission itself and an annex a half-mile away. Neither was heavily guarded because this was a consulate, not an embassy, and as such didn’t garner the same level of security.
Better questions would be: Why did the GOP house cut over $300 million from the State Department’s security budget when they knew troop deployments had stretched Marines so thin that we had to rely on outside security contractors? And, if Susan Rice is disqualified from the Secretary of State post because of four lives lost, why wasn’t Condi Rice, who as National Security Advisor, lost over 3,000 on 9/11 not disqualified for the Secretary slot?
As for the four votes to deny our military body armor, Baldwin was listed as a co-sponsor for legislation that would allow tax payers to stipulate that their income taxes wouldn’t be used for war. Except there was never any vote. The measure has not come up for a vote in committee or on the House floor during Baldwin’s 14 years in Congress. And if it did, the bill would still have no impact on defense spending because federal tax dollars are “fungible.”
Lest we forget, in 2005, it was the Bush administration and its contactors that were exposed supplying substandard body armor to our troops in Iraq with a subsequent recall of more than 23,000 defective vests.
Congratulations, Wisconsin, for electing a president that wasn’t a fall back choice or, as Grover Norquist said about Mitt Romney, “We have reconciled ourselves to Romney because Romney would make a weak and passive president who will concede leadership to congressional conservatives. We are not auditioning for fearless leader.”
John Kocovsky, Hazelhurst