Thursday, November 15, 2012

benghazi, benghazi, benghazi!!!

i still don't see what exactly the scandal is in "benghazigate".

is it that the president didn't label it "terrorism" as fast as his critics wanted him to? (yeah but he actually did refer to it as terrorism several times in the days after the attack, and even if he hadn't, so what? is there some rule that all terrorist attacks must be publicly labeled as one within 24 hours?)

is it that the president didn't dispatch a lightning strike force to swoop in an kill all the bad guys and rescue the diplomats? (unless there was already a team on standby i don't see how that would have been possible)

is it that the administration didn't give the benghazi consulate enough security before the attack? (that's actually a real point, but i don't see how that makes it a major watergate-style scandal. the fact that the republicans cut the state department's budget for overseas security makes it less of a obama administration issue and more of a DC in general issue. the fix would be to restore the DOS' budget, not hold multiple hearings in congress)

is it anything else? can anyone give a clear argument of why this is or should be a real scandal?

look, i'm not going to claim that the obama administration won't eventually do something scandalous. but until the people humping the benghazigate angle can actually articulate what makes this a real scandal, it will just seem like crass political opportunism. also, stuff like this.

UPDATE: i don't know if this is right, but the theory makes a lot sense than i've seen from proponents of the scandal. (via memeorandum)