The Bible Week 1
This begins a 16 week study on the Bible, How we got it and why we can trust it.
httpv://youtu.be/YuOMzepdvhc
Debate 4: Income Inequality – Reply 2
Here is the second round of replies for the Energion debate between the more liberal author Joel Watts and myself on “What Should Be Done About Income Inequality in the United States?“ You can find Joel Watts’ reply here. You can find my reply here.
The Epistles of John: Living in Truth and Love. 1 John 5:17-21
httpv://youtu.be/e0sGIEzre88
Debate 4: Income Inequality – Reply 1
Here is the first replies for Energion debate between the more liberal author Joel Watts on “What Should Be Done About Income Inequality in the United States?“ You can find Joel Watts’ reply here. You can find my reply here.
Complicity
Following this week’s Benghazi hearings it is hard to know which is the most troubling. The first was that, while it was not a surprise to anyone who had been following the story, it became abundantly clear that the Administration lied for weeks following the attacks with their attempt to blame this on a protest over a video.
There was no protest, and this was known right from the start. It was known when Hillary was on a call to Hicks at 2:00 AM that it was a terrorist attack. This eliminates the possibility of errors. When Rice did her marathon of the Sunday Morning shows, the administration knew it was a terrorist attack and that their cover story was a lie.
This is also very clear from the other things that emerged from the testimony: Hicks was told to keep silence (i.e., that there was a cover up), that the administrations lies “immeasurably” damaged relations with Libya resulting in a delay of over two weeks in getting investigators into Libya. When Hicks challenged the administration on their lies, he was demoted.
But while some things were cleared up, many questions remain.
Why were the requests for help denied? Why was Lt Colonel Gibson twice told to stand down, and who made these decisions? Claims that they could not have gotten there in time are ludicrous. At the time that Lt Col Gibson was told to stand down the battle was in progress and no one knew how long it would last. So how could they possibly have known they could not get there in time?
Why didn’t Hillary ever bother to call back?
Why were the talking points used by Rice changed from being correct to being a lie and who was responsible?
Most importantly: Where was Obama in all this? The best we can tell, he was MIA.
While this is all very troubling, sadly, it is not all that unusual to have politicians lying. What is very disturbing is the way that both democrats and the major media have become complicit in the administration’s lies and subsequent cover up. Of course the standard justification is that “both sides do it” but this is just false. Lest we forget, the key question of the Watergate hearings was asked by a Republican. (What did Nixon know and when did he know it – asked by Howard Baker).
It is one thing to defend your side when there is some doubt about the charge. It is quite another thing to do so when all doubt has disappeared. It is just a fact that for weeks following the attack, the administration, including Clinton and Obama, blamed this on a video. Perhaps the most callous was when Secretary of State Clinton, speaking to the families on the arrival of the caskets containing the bodies, blamed this on an “awful Internet video.”
It is also just a fact that this was a terrorist attack and that the video had nothing to do with it. Now in theory one might claim they did not know this and that these statements were errors not lies, however, that simply cannot be maintained given the time line and what is known from the calls, emails, and testimony.
Yet we are effectively told “nothing to see here, move along.” Aren’t there any Democrats who would put the truth ahead of their party? Aren’t there any in the media outside of Fox News and talk radio who cared that the President lied to the country for weeks? Are they all going to become complicit in the cover-up?
When it became clear that President Nixon was involved in obstruction of Justice, Republican went to the White House and demanded that he resign. When it became clear that President Clinton not only was involved in obstruction of Justice, but had also committed perjury, Democrats likewise went to the White House. But instead of asking him to resign, they held a pep rally, and then assisted him in diverting attention away from his crimes; by claiming “it was just about sex.” Tell that to anyone who has been convicted of sexual harassment, which was the core complaint.
But that seems to be the modern Democratic Party: my party right or wrong, and the truth be dammed. That is a very dangerous attitude for anyone in a position of power.
