[tomder55]

That means when Big sis got caught requisitioning bag pipes ,she swiftly cancelled the req.

[speechlesstx]

Yep, bad optics for a guy trying to convince us how painful the cuts are.

[tomder55]

There were air traffic delays because the adm made the bone headed decision to furlough air traffic controllers under the false pretext that across the board meant an elementary and literal interpretion of across the board. Well Congress had to step in to set him straight .

But the real question is ;why is the air traffic control system a government run agency ? Why not privative ? It makes sense to me . Nav Canada ;a privatized system the Canadians employ won the IATA Eagle Award 3 times as the best air service in the world . Australia and the UK also have private air traffic control systems, as do dozens of other nations... many of them in Europe.
So the way to shrink the government would be to privatize many of the services that the US government just assumes it should directly run.

[excon]

Hello Dreamers:

I don't know. You're the ONLY group in the world who wants to CUT, CUT, CUT, but when the cuts happen, you get bummed when your services get cut too. I don't know HOW you are UNABLE to connect dot A - LESS MONEY, with dot B - LESS SERVICE.

After cutting their budget, you thought the level of security shouldn't have gone down at the Benghazi Embassy. When somebody was KILLED, it's not YOUR fault.. After cutting their budget, you piss and moan about White House tours being cut, but that's Obama's fault. After cutting their budget you get mad when the FAA cuts back, but it's not YOUR fault.

Seems to me, like SIMPLE math... Oh, that's right... Republicans can't ADD.

excon

[tomder55]

Everyone in the State Dept admits that budget cuts had nothing to do with the security arrangement in Benghazi. So you can put that argument into the trash heap. I just illustrated above where privatizing air traffic control results in a superior level of service . Even Obot econoomist Peter Orszag wrote that Washington should strip responsibility of air traffic control "away from the FAA and assign it to a private, nonprofit organization."
... "the U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded in a 2005 review, these operators have maintained or even improved air safety, while they have lowered costs and boosted efficiency by investing in new technology."
Private Air-Traffic System Can Soar: Peter Orszag - Bloomberg

The only real objection to this would come from the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. Too bad . Better service at lower costs ;and one less job the government mismanages .

[paraclete]

Ah Ex you really shouldn't give the nuckle draggers a hard time, it isn't their fault after all they are not in government. Benghazi was a secret operation, an embarrassment, be content they are embarrassed because those nuckle draggers exist on both sides, can't you see them now? Big fellows with lots of upper body development and very small heads? You know they got their degrees on football scholarships

[excon]

Hello tom:

everyone in the State Dept admits that budget cuts had nothing to do with the security arrangement in Benghazi...

Washington should strip responsibility of air traffic control "away from the FAA and assign it to a private, nonprofit organization."..

Couple things.

I don't know who "everyone" in the State Department is. Maybe they can't add either.. I can. When you cut a budget for security, you have LESS security. THAT is just so.

I have no problem with striping the FAA from the Government. But, it's a straw man to bring it up as a reason why the FAA should be able to provide the SAME level of service when its budget was substantially CUT. You STILL haven't connected the dots.

Third, why don't you want your new company to make a profit? Wassa matter with profit?? I'll take what you said, and raise you one. We should PRIVATIZE the nations airports.

Excon

[speechlesstx]

If there were in fact budget cuts you might, MIGHT have a point. The only thing that was cut was the percentage of INCREASE. In the real world a budget cut means less money, not more money.

[tomder55]

In testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security ;who was personally responsible for the security decisions in Benghazi , was asked, “Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

Lamb responded, “No, sir.”
State Department: Budget Had Nothing To Do With Security Decisions At Benghazi - YouTube

[excon]

Hello wingers:

Couple things.

I don't CARE how many dufus's you produce. When you CUT security budgets, you get LESS security..

So, in your revisionist mind, the sequester wasn't designed to HURT everybody.. Instead it was a shrewd Republican strategy to get rid of waste in government..

Boy, oh boy, oh boy...

excon

[speechlesstx]

Except a) the budget was not CUT and b) the sequester was Obama's deal. But you stick with the lies.

[tomder55]

Ummm you do realize the Benghazi attack was Sept 11 ,2012 and the sequester began March 1,2013 . That's 6 months before the sequester kicked in .

[speechlesstx]

Math is hard, so are calendars.

[speechlesstx]

Speaking of the sequester and calendars, since the sequester the Interior Dept has named 13 new historic sites to maintain and is still trying to acquire more federal land to add to the 1/3 of the country the feds already own and can't afford to take care of now.

Priorities.

[excon]

Hello again,

That's IT?? That's your response?? The State Department budge was CUT before the Sequester... Did you think I made a mistake? Never happen.

excon

[tomder55]

Your mistake is in claiming that budget cuts affected the level of security at the ,Benghazi 'special mission' (ie not a consulate like the press tried to make you believe)

The fact is that the State Dept ignored specific requests for additional security by Ambassador Stevens... and Charlene Lamb correctly testified that the level of security had northing to do with budgetary considerations .

Another official, Eric Nordstrom, who was responsible for protecting US diplomats in Libya, said that he too sought additional resources. But he said he was told over the phone by a senior state department official responsible for handling the request, Charlene Lamb, not to make anymore because "there would be too much political cost".

Benghazi attack testimony claims state department ignored warnings | World news | guardian.co.uk
The truth is that the State Dept did not want a high level of security there because the Benghazi mission was really a CIA operation ,that Ambassador Stevens was also involved in.

After that Republican members of Congress honed in on Lamb, who was also a witness, accusing her of failing to recognize the seriousness of the threat.
Lamb responded that the requests were for more personnel in Tripoli and it would have made no difference to how many security men would have been protecting the Benghazi consulate where protection was in any case mostly in the hands of a pro-government militia.

"We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11," Lamb testified.
However, Republican attempts to accuse the state department of leaving the consulate vulnerable by refusing requests for more security were delivered a blow when Nordstrom was asked how many agents he wanted to protect the Benghazi site. He said he asked for three. The hearing then heard that there were five at the time of the attack.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

The truth is that the State Dept did not want a high level of security there because the Benghazi mission was really a CIA operation ,that Ambassador Stevens was also involved in.

So, you want your cake and eat it too?

Apparently, the decision was to either blow the CIA operation or risk attack.. They chose wrong. Four people died. That's what happens in war. I don't understand your outrage.

Excon

[tomder55]

That would be a good tale if the attack only lasted in the morning . But even then the
White House and the State Dept have to account for the pure fabrication of the cause of the attack. That's a starter . Next Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods died many hours after the initial attack ;after their requests for back up was ignored . There was ample time to get a quick reaction force there before the attack on the CIA compound.

In their book, "Benghazi: The Definitive Report," Jack Murphy and Brandon Webb say that a cause of the attack were covert JSOC operations in Libya planned and executed by Deputy National Security Advisor John O. Brennan, with tacit support from Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael G. Vickers, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, and Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command Admiral William H. McRaven, which led to a retaliation from militias. These were the same militias that Stevens was working with arming Syrian rebels with weapons from the Q~Daffy army .We need to know the details about that because if true ;the Emperor has been lying to us as to the level of support we've given to radical groups in Syria that oppose Assad .

We have been lied to about the attack from the beginning because the truth could've cost Obama the election.Every day more of the onion is peeled away and the truth does stink.
The whistle blowers will be the final nail in the adm deception. That's why the Emperor sounded like a blithering idiot during yesterday's presser .

One thing that was exposed as a lie early on was that budget cuts at State contributed to the situation. That lie didn't last as long as the fabrication about the YouTube video.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

White House and the State Dept have to account for the pure fabrication of the cause of the attack.

You don't think they should try to conceal CIA covert operations? Ronald Reagan concealed a covert war. You like him, don't you? Like I said, you want your cake and eat it too.

Plus, you can say it as many times as you wish, but when you CUT a budget you get LESS service. I don't care HOW many dufus's you parade to say otherwise.

You are consistent, though.. You have the same cockeyed belief about the Sequester...

Excon

[tomder55]

You're talking about an adm that cuts White House tours to punish the children of us unwashed.. If they could get away with blaming the attack on budget cuts they would've already.