Dear GOP blog trolls: Drop Benghazi, Nobody Cares About Manufactuired Old News

[BDBoop]

Very interesting read.

The psychology behind Republicans' Benghazi obsession - Vox

So Benghazi became a classic Sunstein-Vermeule conspiracy theory. Conservatives became convinced the administration was covering up the truth about Benghazi and anyone who argued otherwise began to look like part of the conspiracy, or at least an unwitting dupe. A wealth of psychological research on group polarization shows that, when a group of likeminded people discuss an issue together, everyone's mind tends to shift towards the dominant view of that issue in the group. The more conservative legislators and media figures dug in on Benghazi, the more all conservatives were likely to believe in some kind of administration malfeasance.

Conspiracy theory adherents, Sunstein and Vermuele write, "become increasingly distrustful and suspicious of the motives of others or of the larger society." This means that "the government's effort at rebuttal" might actually "serve to fortify rather than undermine the original belief." Evidence the Obama administration released disconfirming the existence of any Benghazi wrongdoing became confirming evidence of a coverup. The State Department internal review, Hillary Clinton's testimony, even key military and CIA witnesses confirming the administration's story to House and Senate Republicans' faces — none of it changed all that much. Why would the White House be spinning so hard if they had nothing to hide?

The media supercharged this psychological effect. We know from research on American politics that when the President takes a position on an issue, the opposition party is strongly inclined push back in the opposite direction. Conservative media has a similar dynamic with the mainstream media: as more and more outlets concluded there was no "there" there, conservative media became more convinced that the mainstream side simply had Obama's back.

 

[Samson]

The old guard at the GOP learns slow... Maybe they're senile?


So, yeah. We get it. You want to witch hunt Hillary & the dems over this curiously manufactured crisis that happened, again, on "9-11" just on the eve of a pivotal election year 2012.

We all know about how middle voter people tend to vote when they are afraid of a crisis: republican, obviously...the "father figure" party. So what were terrorists thinking striking so close to a pivotal American election when doing so would surely give the GOP an advantage...when they know the GOP is the party all-about invading their countries, meddling in their affairs and all about oil? Doesn't add up.

Anyway...

Even if it did make sense and the dems were negligent, it's OLD NEWS and the GOP's illegal invasion of Iraq where tens of thousands were killed pales the story of Benghazi, where less than 10 Americans were killed.

Again, doesn't add up.

The more the GOP harps on Benghazi, the more people in the middle will lean left. It has become beyond obvious what is going on. If the GOP wants a chance, they should pay attention to the yawns and the switching of channels when they start up on it again. It's hard to stump to a crowd when they're walking away..

Very funny, I wonder why the left wants this dropped so bad, if it is REALLY no big deal, the left wouldn't be trying to bury it.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

"The Left" doesn't speak with one voice, that's what defines the echo chamber, a set of of 'parrots' who hold opinions fed to them by the propagandists of the vast right wing conspiracy, focused on fundamentally changing America into an Oligarchy.

Behghazzzzzzzzi is one more manufactured 'scandal' within an entire host of unproven allegations which has dominated the debate since President Obama was nominated by the Democratic Party.

Other than parroting MSNBC and Bill Maher, how do you know it was not a scandal?

Have you seen every document associated with the incident?

No.

 

[Samson]

Very interesting read.

The psychology behind Republicans' Benghazi obsession - Vox

So Benghazi became a classic Sunstein-Vermeule conspiracy theory. Conservatives became convinced the administration was covering up the truth about Benghazi and anyone who argued otherwise began to look like part of the conspiracy, or at least an unwitting dupe. A wealth of psychological research on group polarization shows that, when a group of likeminded people discuss an issue together, everyone's mind tends to shift towards the dominant view of that issue in the group. The more conservative legislators and media figures dug in on Benghazi, the more all conservatives were likely to believe in some kind of administration malfeasance.

Conspiracy theory adherents, Sunstein and Vermuele write, "become increasingly distrustful and suspicious of the motives of others or of the larger society." This means that "the government's effort at rebuttal" might actually "serve to fortify rather than undermine the original belief." Evidence the Obama administration released disconfirming the existence of any Benghazi wrongdoing became confirming evidence of a coverup. The State Department internal review, Hillary Clinton's testimony, even key military and CIA witnesses confirming the administration's story to House and Senate Republicans' faces — none of it changed all that much. Why would the White House be spinning so hard if they had nothing to hide?

The media supercharged this psychological effect. We know from research on American politics that when the President takes a position on an issue, the opposition party is strongly inclined push back in the opposite direction. Conservative media has a similar dynamic with the mainstream media: as more and more outlets concluded there was no "there" there, conservative media became more convinced that the mainstream side simply had Obama's back.

Interesting why?

Because it echos more echos? Or because it references psychobabble?

Probably both.

 

[1776]

The obvious of a cover-up is staring right in the face of liberal scum.....Obama has done NOTHING to get the terrorists that have been openly interviewed by western media in Libya.

These terrorists aren't hiding in Pakistan in a Top Secret compound, they are being tracked by the media and USG but Obama doesn't want to bring them back to the US for trial......because it will expose his lies that it was some "protest riot" and it will remind everyone that he did nothing to save 4 Americans he sent to die in Libya.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The old guard at the GOP learns slow... Maybe they're senile?


So, yeah. We get it. You want to witch hunt Hillary & the dems over this curiously manufactured crisis that happened, again, on "9-11" just on the eve of a pivotal election year 2012.

We all know about how middle voter people tend to vote when they are afraid of a crisis: republican, obviously...the "father figure" party. So what were terrorists thinking striking so close to a pivotal American election when doing so would surely give the GOP an advantage...when they know the GOP is the party all-about invading their countries, meddling in their affairs and all about oil? Doesn't add up.

Anyway...

Even if it did make sense and the dems were negligent, it's OLD NEWS and the GOP's illegal invasion of Iraq where tens of thousands were killed pales the story of Benghazi, where less than 10 Americans were killed.

Again, doesn't add up.

The more the GOP harps on Benghazi, the more people in the middle will lean left. It has become beyond obvious what is going on. If the GOP wants a chance, they should pay attention to the yawns and the switching of channels when they start up on it again. It's hard to stump to a crowd when they're walking away..

Since the once and no more GOP feels old news is good news one need only remember their Messiah Ronald Reagan's greatest failure, when his negligence cause the deaths of 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers in Beirut in 1983.

Or G.W. Bush sending American troops into Iraq without the means to protect themselves from IEP's ( "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time," Mr. Rumsfeld said.)! See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-rumsfeld.html?_r=0

Sure, start a thread, see how much interest there is.......

Six thousand, plus or minus, Americans lost their lives under Reagan and G.W. Bush and four Americans died at Benghazi. Those killed at Beruit and in the Iraq war of choice may seem trivial to a partisan hack, it doesn't to me.

 

[Samson]

Since the once and no more GOP feels old news is good news one need only remember their Messiah Ronald Reagan's greatest failure, when his negligence cause the deaths of 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers in Beirut in 1983.

Or G.W. Bush sending American troops into Iraq without the means to protect themselves from IEP's ( "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time," Mr. Rumsfeld said.)! See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-rumsfeld.html?_r=0

Sure, start a thread, see how much interest there is.......

Six thousand, plus or minus, Americans lost their lives under Reagan and G.W. Bush and four Americans died at Benghazi. That may seem trivial to a partisan hack, it doesn't to me.

More blithering.

Start threads with polls similar to the one here.

You won't because you know that few symathise with your absurd analogy.



But don't let that stop you from throwing more red herring at a thread than a drunk greek fisherman on Saint Papadolous Day.

 

[RKMBrown]

But Bush!! ROFL libtards.

 

[1776]

Since the liberal idiot said "2 years ago" is like old.....well that means no more comments about Buuuuuuuush by liberals should be the standard.

 

[Silhouette]

But Bush!! ROFL libtards.

But Hillary! ROFL conservatives. It's all so "two years [plus] ago"...

 

[mudwhistle]

But Bush!! ROFL libtards.

But Hillary! ROFL conservatives. It's all so "two years [plus] ago"...

The statute of limitations ran out on Benghazi like two years ago.

It never runs out on Bush...

 

[HenryBHough]

We won't know what difference it makes until mid-November. Poll up top offers some hints but there's still time for the Democrat fog machine to come up with something to shift the focus. Maybe an international prize for best head-of-state golfer?

 

[shart_attack]

Whew-eeeeee.

I ain't seen someone owned by his own poll results this lop-sidedly since the Chicago Tribune declared that Dewey defeated Truman back in 1948!!!

 

[mudwhistle]

Since the once and no more GOP feels old news is good news one need only remember their Messiah Ronald Reagan's greatest failure, when his negligence cause the deaths of 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers in Beirut in 1983.

Or G.W. Bush sending American troops into Iraq without the means to protect themselves from IEP's ( "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time," Mr. Rumsfeld said.)! See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-rumsfeld.html?_r=0

Sure, start a thread, see how much interest there is.......

Six thousand, plus or minus, Americans lost their lives under Reagan and G.W. Bush and four Americans died at Benghazi. Those killed at Beruit and in the Iraq war of choice may seem trivial to a partisan hack, it doesn't to me.

1961 deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan since Obama took office. You don't see the GOP throwing a party every time we go over another thousand like the Democrats did.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Sure, start a thread, see how much interest there is.......

Six thousand, plus or minus, Americans lost their lives under Reagan and G.W. Bush and four Americans died at Benghazi. Those killed at Beruit and in the Iraq war of choice may seem trivial to a partisan hack, it doesn't to me.

1961 deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan since Obama took office. You don't see the GOP throwing a party every time we go over another thousand like the Democrats did.

They did? I don't remember that. Got video?

Oddly, you seem pretty pumped about the 1961 for some reason. Why is that?

 

[mudwhistle]

Six thousand, plus or minus, Americans lost their lives under Reagan and G.W. Bush and four Americans died at Benghazi. Those killed at Beruit and in the Iraq war of choice may seem trivial to a partisan hack, it doesn't to me.

1961 deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan since Obama took office. You don't see the GOP throwing a party every time we go over another thousand like the Democrats did.

They did? I don't remember that. Got video?

Oddly, you seem pretty pumped about the 1961 for some reason. Why is that?

All you have to do is Google it.

It's on the record for everyone to see.

 

[LoneLaugher]

1961 deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan since Obama took office. You don't see the GOP throwing a party every time we go over another thousand like the Democrats did.

They did? I don't remember that. Got video?

Oddly, you seem pretty pumped about the 1961 for some reason. Why is that?

All you have to do is Google it.

It's on the record for everyone to see.

Please. Link me to the party that was thrown for the 1000th, 2000th, 3000th or 4000th troop death. Surely you have some evidence.

 

[mudwhistle]

They did? I don't remember that. Got video?

Oddly, you seem pretty pumped about the 1961 for some reason. Why is that?

All you have to do is Google it.

It's on the record for everyone to see.

Please. Link me to the party that was thrown for the 1000th, 2000th, 3000th or 4000th troop death. Surely you have some evidence.

Try Googling it...twerp.

 

[1776]

Liberals rely on the media to keep the average dumb American from finding out what happened in Libya, just like they rely on the media to cover up obamacare fucking up their medical care, etc.

That is why liberals want this Libya mess to go away, the longer it sticks around the more chance of the dumb average American figuring out Obama is a criminal.

 

[francoHFW]

No lies, no cover up ,- a tragedy. Always OBVIOUSLY an act of terror, no way help could get there in time, and yes the video probably triggered it, and since no one KNOWS the motive, WHAT DOES YOUR BS MATTER?

Hater dupes!

 

[Oldstyle]

No lies, no cover up ,- a tragedy. Always OBVIOUSLY an act of terror, no way help could get there in time, and yes the video probably triggered it, and since no one KNOWS the motive, WHAT DOES YOUR BS MATTER?

Hater dupes!

And yet time after time after time...when asked if it WAS an act of terror...Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney all declined to say that obviously it was.

Now a year and a half later, Carney has the gall to stand in front of the same White House Press Corps that he lied to and lecture them about it being "self evident". That little worm is lucky those reporters aren't throwing rotten fruit at him he's such an AWFUL liar.