PDA

View Full Version : GOP voted to cut funding for embassy security



phins_4_ever
10-10-2012, 11:05 PM
Bitching about the WH for not providing enough security for embassies yet cutting funding for the said purpose. Grandiose.

I declare the GOP unamerican and unpatriotic and a danger to our national security. :chuckle:

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/10/985191/chaffetz-absolutely-funding-embassy-security/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-chaffetz-embassy_n_1954912.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

It really doesn't matter at this point if the staff was at the levels requested by embassy staff. No. What matters is the charge of the GOP, Romney and Ryan that the WH did not increase security to prevent the Benghazi attacks. Cutting funding and then shifting blame. Fantastic.

rob19
10-10-2012, 11:10 PM
lol

trojanma
10-10-2012, 11:15 PM
Not sure if "lol" should be the response to info like this.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

phins_4_ever
10-10-2012, 11:24 PM
Not sure if "lol" should be the response to info like this.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
what should the response be?

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 12:41 PM
what should the response be?

How about taking the politics out of it and finding out what went wrong and fixing it pronto ...........

4 Americans died from an obvious miscalculation ...also do not see the slightest bit of humor....and find it hard to believe that one would even ask such a question

Buddy
10-11-2012, 01:02 PM
"For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.)"

I took the above quote from the Thinkprogress.org article that you listed above. It doesn't appear that you read the article or at least never made it past the headline and first paragraph because it clearly shows that the State Department budget was only cut from $2.15 billion to 2.022 billion ($1.934B + $.088B) which amounts to a .94% cut in the PROPOSED budget. Now you expect me to believe that because the compromised budget fell less than one percent below the proposed amount, it prevented the State Department from allocating proper resources to obviously dangerous situations and allowed for four Americans to be slaughtered? They couldn't find funding for a dozen or so soldiers or Blackwater guys in more than $2 billion? I don't expect you to jump ship and become a right wing nut job like me but come on...you have to be smarter than this. The Obama Administration and the State Department should just come out and say they screwed up and put measures in place to ensure they don't happen again. However, they have proven time and time again that taking responsibility for their part in anything negative is not going to happen. So long as they have the Hollywood propaganda machine, where reality is totally optional, and droves of loyal fans that look no further into situations than headlines then I suppose we can expect this to be the "New Normal". Yeah, I can't wait!

phins_4_ever
10-11-2012, 01:09 PM
How about taking the politics out of it and finding out what went wrong and fixing it pronto ...........

4 Americans died from an obvious miscalculation ...also do not see the slightest bit of humor....and find it hard to believe that one would even ask such a question

Of course when the Republicans are caught with their pants down we don't want to make it politics. Please be reminded that the GOP, Romney and Ryan politicized this event since it happened. And what I have done I don't call 'politicizing this tragic event'. I am calling it 'showing the true face of the GOP and their chosen candidates'. Despicable. Unpatriotic. Unamerican.

I also did not find the slightest humor in 9/11/2001 yet it did not prevent the Bush administration to use this event for political purposes their entire time in office.

So don't give that crap about not politicizing. The GOP are the masters at reveling in death and selling death for political purposes.

phins_4_ever
10-11-2012, 01:22 PM
"For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.)"

I took the above quote from the Thinkprogress.org article that you listed above. It doesn't appear that you read the article or at least never made it past the headline and first paragraph because it clearly shows that the State Department budget was only cut from $2.15 billion to 2.022 billion ($1.934B + $.088B) which amounts to a .94% cut in the PROPOSED budget. Now you expect me to believe that because the compromised budget fell less than one percent below the proposed amount, it prevented the State Department from allocating proper resources to obviously dangerous situations and allowed for four Americans to be slaughtered? They couldn't find funding for a dozen or so soldiers or Blackwater guys in more than $2 billion? I don't expect you to jump ship and become a right wing nut job like me but come on...you have to be smarter than this. The Obama Administration and the State Department should just come out and say they screwed up and put measures in place to ensure they don't happen again. However, they have proven time and time again that taking responsibility for their part in anything negative is not going to happen. So long as they have the Hollywood propaganda machine, where reality is totally optional, and droves of loyal fans that look no further into situations than headlines then I suppose we can expect this to be the "New Normal". Yeah, I can't wait!

The 2.15 Billion was for the entire department not just the embassy security. The embassy security was a much smaller number which put the 128 Million in perspective. I found a link yesterday which put the 128 Million figure into the 30% range of the 2011 budget for embassy security and the 300 Million number in the 50% range. That would put the budget for embassy security into the 450 Million (2011) and 600 Million range (2012) which look like reasonable numbers. Unfortunately I left the laptop (on battery) unattended and lost the links before saving them. But I will look for them later.

You are right the numbers itself look rather small compare to the entire budget request but the 2 billion plus is for the entire Security program of the State Department which includes security abroad and home for all employees including Hillary Clinton traveling.

Honestly we don't know what effect the cuts really had. My point was and is that you can not blame the WH for not providing additional security when you simply cut the budget.

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 01:24 PM
Of course when the Republicans are caught with their pants down we don't want to make it politics. Please be reminded that the GOP, Romney and Ryan politicized this event since it happened. And what I have done I don't call 'politicizing this tragic event'. I am calling it 'showing the true face of the GOP and their chosen candidates'. Despicable. Unpatriotic. Unamerican.

I also did not find the slightest humor in 9/11/2001 yet it did not prevent the Bush administration to use this event for political purposes their entire time in office.

So don't give that crap about not politicizing. The GOP are the masters at reveling in death and selling death for political purposes.

OK you can't take politics out of it ? fine :

If I'm not mistaken the Democrates are running the show or rather should I say this asylum..........and doing their best to cover their dumb asses over this horrendous, catastrophic show of deceit and ineptitude, and trying to "covering it up" and 4 people died so I think it deserves to be exposed no matter what party was responsible...... looks like another nail going into Obla bla's coffin......
Christ this administration is the best thing for the Romney Campaign and their self destructing ineptitude coming out at such a critical time.........

JamesBW43
10-11-2012, 01:46 PM
How about taking the politics out of it and finding out what went wrong and fixing it pronto ...........

4 Americans died from an obvious miscalculation ...also do not see the slightest bit of humor....and find it hard to believe that one would even ask such a question


It turns out that Ambassador Stevens had warned the administration that he was an Al Qaeda target. His security detail made repeated warnings that the situation was deteriorating in Eastern Libya. But someone back in Washington didnít take it seriously. He or they, decided not only to deny the request for additional security for the ambassador and our Consulate, but also to reduce the existing minimal security detail.

Obama taking his campaign more serious than Americans security around the world. This Clown is either the most dispicable human being putting his own personal needs above the security of our Country and citizens, or just as possible, He just doesn't have a clue, which would seem to follow the partern of his policies, whatever they truly are.

Wow, seems like the whole friggin administration is trying to put or draw out all their policies till after the election....

4 more years of this kind of leadership .........

:err:

Buddy
10-11-2012, 01:51 PM
"Honestly we don't know what effect the cuts really had. My point was and is that you can not blame the WH for not providing additional security when you simply cut the budget."

Are you saying that if Congress does not fully fund every aspect of this administration's programs then the administration can't be held liable for the results? You can not possibly believe this. The numbers you list also make the assumption that all of the money not approved from the proposed budget came directly from embassy security. That should be about the last place it should come from. They could find 1% in office supplies or something innocuous...insinuating that it had anything to do with this terrorist act is ridiculous and insulting. Congress has nothing to say about where the money is allocated within the department once it is appropriated


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 01:51 PM
:err:

Oh "my Bad"

rob19
10-11-2012, 01:56 PM
Now you expect me to believe that because the compromised budget fell less than one percent below the proposed amount, it prevented the State Department from allocating proper resources to obviously dangerous situations and allowed for four Americans to be slaughtered? ---

The Obama Administration and the State Department should just come out and say they screwed up and put measures in place to ensure they don't happen again.

Would one of those measures be to increase spending on embassy security? Obviously a tragic situation, but I don't think anyone's suggesting Obama handled this well. However I do think some people recognize the irony of the source of criticism given that their own budget is the lower of the two. Hindsight aside, I think it's hard to know if more would have been done with a lower budget. Spending less on security and expecting more of it seems a little like having your cake & eating it too.

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 01:59 PM
[QUOTE=Buddy;1064456224]"Honestly we don't know what effect the cuts really had. My point was and is that you can not blame the WH for not providing additional security when you simply cut the budget."

Are you saying that if Congress does not fully fund every aspect of this administration's programs then the administration can't be held liable for the results? You can not possibly believe this. The numbers you list also make the assumption that all of the money not approved from the proposed budget came directly from embassy security. That should be about the last place it should come from. They could find 1% in office supplies or something innocuous...insinuating that it had anything to do with this terrorist act is ridiculous and insulting. Congress has nothing to say about where the money is allocated within the department once it is appropriated

I agree with you about how the limited knowledge of were the funds would be used plays a huge roll. Also would think that if there were not enough money to fund the embasys security issues, common sense seems to be Take out our people. I mean this doesn't seem to be that difficult to understand. And if Repblicans were limiting funds that actually protect our people they should also be held accountable....But for gods sake if you can't protect get our people out of there...

phins_4_ever
10-11-2012, 02:03 PM
"Honestly we don't know what effect the cuts really had. My point was and is that you can not blame the WH for not providing additional security when you simply cut the budget."

Are you saying that if Congress does not fully fund every aspect of this administration's programs then the administration can't be held liable for the results? You can not possibly believe this. The numbers you list also make the assumption that all of the money not approved from the proposed budget came directly from embassy security. That should be about the last place it should come from. They could find 1% in office supplies or something innocuous...insinuating that it had anything to do with this terrorist act is ridiculous and insulting. Congress has nothing to say about where the money is allocated within the department once it is appropriated


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

My point is not the performance or lack thereof by the WH, Congress in general or anything like that. My point is that you can not scream fire and point fingers and complain that the fire department is slow when you had a hand in it to spark the fire and a hand in it which took away the ability of the fire department to respond in an appropriate time frame.

It is really not that hard to understand.

---------- Post added at 02:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 PM ----------


:err:

:lol:

As some have said. Just a child with a temper tantrum. :chuckle:

Buddy
10-11-2012, 02:04 PM
Rob, I don't even know if the budget was actually cut...they just got <1% led than they asked for. The article doesn't mention why the budget was YOY. Something tells me that it was left out on purpose because I have a hard time believing that the actual budget went down.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 02:07 PM
For What Its Worth:

" Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Undersecretary for Management, and Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary responsible for diplomatic security, maintained that security arrangements were adequate. Lamb said .” She denied that budget cuts had affected decision making on security arrangements, as some had charged."

phins_4_ever
10-11-2012, 02:32 PM
For What Its Worth:

" Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Undersecretary for Management, and Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary responsible for diplomatic security, maintained that security arrangements were adequate. Lamb said .” She denied that budget cuts had affected decision making on security arrangements, as some had charged."

It is worth a lot. And I tell you why.

I get always quite annoyed with all these semantics and this forth and back. So this issue became a perfect example to get the right to admit that the charge the GOP, Romney and Ryan have levied against the WH that not enough was done prior to the tragic events was wrong. It became a Presidential campaign tool right after the events.

I saw several links which stated the above but I left them out. Purposely. It didn't fit my agenda. It is much different when I post a link or statement like that or one of you. If I post the statement it is considered 'defending a failing President'.
But if the righties post a statement like that it essentially renders the foreign politics of the GOP in the last 4 weeks useless, shows how incompetent your presidential candidate and his running mate are. And you have just 'defended a failing President'.

Trap snapped. Ouch.

I didn't think that it would be that fast though. I expected to have a few more go-arounds about the budget until someone pulls that quote. But the temper tantrum got the best of you.

:lol:

cuzinvinny
10-11-2012, 02:58 PM
It is worth a lot. And I tell you why.

I get always quite annoyed with all these semantics and this forth and back. So this issue became a perfect example to get the right to admit that the charge the GOP, Romney and Ryan have levied against the WH that not enough was done prior to the tragic events was wrong. It became a Presidential campaign tool right after the events.

I saw several links which stated the above but I left them out. Purposely. It didn't fit my agenda. It is much different when I post a link or statement like that or one of you. If I post the statement it is considered 'defending a failing President'.
But if the righties post a statement like that it essentially renders the foreign politics of the GOP in the last 4 weeks useless, shows how incompetent your presidential candidate and his running mate are. And you have just 'defended a failing President'.

Trap snapped. Ouch.

I didn't think that it would be that fast though. I expected to have a few more go-arounds about the budget until someone pulls that quote. But the temper tantrum got the best of you.

:lol:

Man I don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.......

Buddy
10-11-2012, 04:27 PM
It is worth a lot. And I tell you why.

I get always quite annoyed with all these semantics and this forth and back. So this issue became a perfect example to get the right to admit that the charge the GOP, Romney and Ryan have levied against the WH that not enough was done prior to the tragic events was wrong. It became a Presidential campaign tool right after the events.

I saw several links which stated the above but I left them out. Purposely. It didn't fit my agenda. It is much different when I post a link or statement like that or one of you. If I post the statement it is considered 'defending a failing President'.
But if the righties post a statement like that it essentially renders the foreign politics of the GOP in the last 4 weeks useless, shows how incompetent your presidential candidate and his running mate are. And you have just 'defended a failing President'.

Trap snapped. Ouch.

I didn't think that it would be that fast though. I expected to have a few more go-arounds about the budget until someone pulls that quote. But the temper tantrum got the best of you.

:lol:

I am not exactly sure what your point is either and certainly don't see how this absolves anyone from responsibility except those who established the budget.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Eshlemon
10-11-2012, 05:53 PM
For What Its Worth:

" Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Undersecretary for Management, and Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary responsible for diplomatic security, maintained that security arrangements were adequate. Lamb said .Ē She denied that budget cuts had affected decision making on security arrangements, as some had charged."

The budgets going to be cut more next year, no way the WH wants to appear to not be able to handle doing things with less. Besides if the WH believed the the security arrangements where less than "adequate", the executive branch can send in anywhere they want as last year shows...instead of calling it kinetic military action in Libya last year call it non-kinetic military action, war on terror or whatever it was called when he decided to send 100 troops into Uganda to fight rebels,etc...without Congressional approval.

Spesh
10-11-2012, 06:29 PM
How about taking the politics out of it and finding out what went wrong and fixing it pronto ...........

4 Americans died from an obvious miscalculation ...also do not see the slightest bit of humor....and find it hard to believe that one would even ask such a question



The mother of a former Navy SEAL killed in Libya has called on Mitt Romney to stop talking about her son during his political campaign.

A spokesman for the Republican presidential candidate says Romney will respect her wishes.

Romney in recent days has been telling voters of chance encounter with the former SEAL, Glen Doherty, at a Christmas party two or three years ago. Doherty was among four Americans killed in the attacks in Benghazi.


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/romney-reveals-link-consulate-attack-libya-article-1.1179143#ixzz2923XupDg

Yes, yes, we must keep politics out of it.....unless it can be used for political gain, right?