CRANKY CLINTON, REACHED FOR COMMENT, EXPLAINED THAT SHE DID HAVE A HABIT OF 'TWEAKING' THE TRUTH BUT IT WASN'T OUT OF A DESIRE TO LIE OR DECEIVE, SHE INSISTS, BUT BECAUSE OF HER LOVE FOR DISNEY'S PINOCCHIO.
"MY CAMPAIGN," SHE INSISTED, "IS A HOMAGE TO THAT DISNEY CLASSIC."
The public discourse would be a lot better off if partisan whores would just sit their tired asses down and stop polluting the conversation with spin and misdirection.
Saritha Prabhu is intellectually dishonest or just a plain idiot. At The Tennessean she wants to whine and uses the Congressional Benghazi hearing to start her nonsense:
But listening to the above, one wondered if the Republicans on this panel and in Congress had any sense of irony, or shame or any sense of proportion.
What they said with utter seriousness about ignored warnings and dead Americans and uninvestigated truth seemed to many listeners to apply also on a much bigger scale to the Iraq War.
The origins of the latter have, of course, never been investigated fully.
You care about the Iraq War, do you, Saritha?
No, you don't.
You just lie and lie again.
The reality of that is clear in the quoted passage above.
Saritha claims that Republicans lack a sense of proportion and more.
And they may or they may not, I'm not going down that rabbit hole.
But cheap little whores like Saritha need to be called out.
If you think the Republicans did the right thing or they went overboard or somewhere in between, the issue really isn't the Republicans, not when you bring up the Iraq War.
You should be asking where is the shame of the Congressional Democrats?
The failure to investigate the Iraq War?
The American people used the 2006 mid-term elections to repudiate the Iraq War.
Democrats -- including trashy Nancy Pelosi who needs to be wheeled into a nursing home and not remain leader of the House after she led the party in one losing election after another allowing the GOP to take control of the House?
They're the ones to be outraged at.
They had the permission of the American people to investigate.
They campaigned on this.
They said they'd end the Iraq War, they said control over one House -- just one -- would give them the power to hold hearings and launch investigations.
The American people responded to that by giving them control of not just one house of Congress but both houses of Congress.
Saritha's a two-bit whore whose stupidity or intellectual dishonesty should forbid her from writing her allegedly generic columns (one of which was truly hate speech -- her attack on Christians). But please note, she's castigating Congressional Republicans for not focusing on Iraq when she's got a column, her own space, to write whatever she wants and she doesn't write about Iraq.
She's a fake ass liar.
Ava and I took on MSNBC's 'coverage' of the Benghazi hearing in "TV: The least trusted name in news" and we noted:
And that's why MSNBC is a cesspool.
They offered one voice after another saying the exact same thing.
They could brook no thought or opinion that strayed from the hymnal.
For a brief moment, as the coverage was winding, down, Tom Brokaw appeared.
He expressed the belief that nothing changed with the appearance.
He offered that Hillary had pleased her supporters but done nothing to pull over her detractors.
It was a fair and objective view.
And it's what the entire coverage should have been.
I bring this up now because Brokaw made many outstanding points.
Ava and I could have gone into more of that but I know Tom and like Tom and didn't want to turn his brief moments in the coverage -- we watched two hours of MSNBC coverage and he was probably on for less than six minutes -- into the entire review.
But Tom's most important point may have been that a hearing on Benghazi does not preclude one on Iraq.
It's not an either/or.
And he's right.
And the point I'm making here is if you're upset that there's been no hearing on Iraq (as we've noted before, there have been Congressional hearings on Iraq) -- or upset that it wasn't the type that the Benghazi hearings have been (pointed and often harsh) -- why is that Republican issue?
Again, Democrats held control of no house of Congress in 2005 and 2006 and those two years found Democrats campaigning on the promise of ending the war and doing investigations if they got even one house of Congress -- control of one house.
The American people responded to the campaign promises and gave Democrats control of both houses.
So if you're upset that the Secretary of State (Condi Rice back then) was not immediately called before Congress or someone else to answer for the Iraq War, that's not a Republican issue.
You can lie and whore and be intellectually dishonest.
But the reality is that until the 2010 mid-terms, Democrats controlled both houses of Congess.
They didn't use that power to investigate Iraq any more than they used to end the illegal war.
In case you missed that, and Saritha appears to have missed it, the Iraq War never ended.
Democrats in Congress pretending to care?
And that's why their embrace of Cindy Sheehan ended.
They were happy to promote Cindy when they pretended they were powerless.
But when they had the power and the Iraq War continued?
They turned on Cindy.
And instead of calling the politicians out, whores and spinners found distractions to focus on.
RECOMMENDED: "I Hate The War"