Who Can’t Handle the Truth?

Democrats, controlling the Senate, blocked efforts to join the House investigation of the Benghazi fiasco.

Democratic Senator Bob Menendez (D, NJ) objected, saying the probe is politically motivated and without merit.

Of course, blocking Senate participation in a joint investigation isn’t at all politically motivated or meritless.

If this thing truly is mere politics, why not join in, with enthusiasm? Why not push for full release of unredacted documents and emails and etc from State, DoD, and the White House? Why not expose all of these to the light of day and to the eyes of Americans? If there really is no there there, that will become painfully obvious, in short order, to the Republicans’ severe damage.

Of what, then, are the Democrats so afraid? That there is a significant there there?

Pride and Reluctance

Two hundred and seventy-six young girls were kidnapped by the terrorist organization* Boko Haram, whose leader is threatening to sell them into slavery, if he hasn’t already.

On the matter of offers from the US, Great Britain, Israel, and a number of others of military help both in dealing with these terrorists and presently in recovering the stolen girls, though, Nigerian pride seems more important than the safety of Nigerian children.

Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan’s spokesman Doyin Okupe, has said about foreign military aid

Nigeria is a very proud nation. We feel that to subjugate our military under another world power would be to really compromise our integrity.

How is your national integrity, President Jonathan, not already disastrously compromised by your failure to protect even your children and your present inability to recover them?

 

*Aside: Why is it that so many “news” organizations and “journalists,” all of whom pretend to respectability, keep referring to such gangs as “insurgents” or “radical Islamists?” Why are they so desperate to avoid naming these organized mobs for what they are: terrorists?

Responsibility—Another Thought

Failure on both sides of the question.

A southern California city aims to fight back at bullies by making it a crime to pick on others, in a measure that would protect not only school children but anyone up to age 25 who is targeted for harassment.

“We’re not talking about putting a 5-year-old in jail, we’re talking about intervening in both the bully’s life, who is a person who is hurting too, and the victim’s life,” [Carson Mayor Jim ] Dear said.

But of course. Dealing with bullies is a task for government, not for parents, not for responsible adults. Because 25-yr-old American citizens aren’t adults. After all, they’re still on mumsy’s and pop-pop’s health plan….

The ACLU, though, doesn’t think the proposed law goes far enough.

Brendan Hamme, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said the measure is too vague and does not even spell out how much jail time an offender could potentially face.

Naturally. Adult judgment mustn’t be allowed. That would place responsibility on the citizens, and not on government, or on the ACLU. After all, there’s that whole we’re not adults thing, again. To say nothing about how our taking care of ourselves would put a lot of self-important government officials and lawyers out of jobs.

Finally, there’s this, which makes explicit government’s intent to enter private homes:

We are going to protect not only the kid that is bothered in school, but when you leave school and go home, we’re going to protect you as a city,” said Carson City Councilman Mike Gipson, who co-sponsored the law.

Because the business of parenting—of teaching the kid who’s a bully not to be one, and of teaching the bullied kid how to deal with bullies—is too important to be left to actual parents. Government has to do it, instead. Since parents aren’t responsible adults, you see.

Responsibility

What is this thing, responsibility?

A Detroit teacher [at Pershing High School] has been fired after a cell phone video surfaced of her breaking up a fight between two students with a broom.

Keith Johnson, President of the Detroit Federation of Teachers, understands what this thing, this idea of responsibility, is? He said that

the teacher was wrong for using a broom, although he understands her motive. “Unfortunately, the method that she used, in terms of swatting one with a broom, is a violation of the corporal punishment provision under the Michigan school code. But she’s caught in a quandary because under that same code she’s expected to do what is necessary to diffuse a situation.”

It’s the rules’ responsibility, not the person. Nope, the union rep doesn’t get it.

Then there’s Kiren Lowery, one of the pupils in the fight. He said that

he does not feel responsible for her termination. He thinks she should have waited for security to come.

Because it’s always someone else’s problem. No understanding here, either.

Does any school teach responsibility anymore?

It Doesn’t Get Any Clearer

…than this. Via Catherine Herridge at Fox News.

From: Rhodes, Benjamin J. (Benjamin._J ._Rhodes@[redacted]

Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:09PM

To: Vega, Dag; NSC Deputy Press Secretary; Plouffe, David; Pfeiffer, Dan; Carney, Jay; Palmieri,

Jennifer; Eamest, Joshua R.; Govashiri, Ferial; Ledbetter, Howli [sp] J.; Selak, Dawn; Brundage,

Daniel; Pelton; Erin; Alhassani, Mehdi K.

Subject: RE: PREP CALL with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET

RELEASED IN PART B6

Goals:

• To convey that the United States is doing everything that we can to protect our people and facilities abroad;

• To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet ·video, and not a broatler failure of policy;

• To show that we will be resolute in bringing people who hann Americans to justice, and standing steadfast through these protests;

• To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength artd steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.

RTWT

The referenced email docs can be seen here.