WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican strategy for the fall elections seemed set: hammer Democrats on the health care law and "jobs, jobs, jobs."
As Democrats show increasing confidence on those fronts, however, House Republicans are gambling that ramping up new inquiries into old controversies involving the Internal Revenue Service and Libya will energize conservative voters without turning off moderates.
Over Democrats' heated objections, House Republicans voted this month to hold an IRS official in contempt for refusing to testify. They also launched a new investigation into the September 2012 terrorist attack on a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.
Democrats say the moves reek of
political opportunism and desperation.
Criticizing the president's health care law "has run its course," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, and Republicans "have to find something else to talk about." She called the new Benghazi inquiry a "political stunt." (Z: Nancy, just wait till people start getting sick, then let's see how criticism has 'run its course')
Republicans say their actions are serious and justified, even if they also might be good politics. (Z: Oops...did the Republicans say that or the author added that second half? :-)
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the select committee on Benghazi will not be partisan or involve political "sideshows." But he declined to tell Republicans to stop using the Benghazi tragedy to raise campaign money. (Z: Have Democrats ever had to tell people to stop 'using' any story that would promote their success?)
Republicans acknowledge the hearings could backfire if their select committee members appear overly zealous.
"There's a real burden on us," said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. "We need to not overreach" and simply "figure out what the truth is." He predicted the select committee chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., will "lean over backward to be fair."
Democrats spend little time defending the Obama administration's role in Benghazi or the IRS' actions in scrutinizing conservative groups that sought tax-exempt status. Instead, they cite the multiple hearings and inquiries already conducted into the matters, which were fading from national headlines except on outlets such as Fox News. (Z: Finally, some truth. Yes, looks like the Democrats are using this politically even more than the Republicans. They don't want these stories scrutinized and they'll blame Republicans for looking into them. unreal)
An inspector general's report blamed poor management in an IRS office that gave special scrutiny to conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. But it found no evidence of political conspiracy. (Z: Oops! Someone hasn't read all the IRS emails, has he).
The division's director, Lois Lerner, infuriated Republicans a year ago by proclaiming her innocence at a House Oversight Committee hearing and then declining to answer questions, citing her constitutional right against self-incrimination. In a mostly party-line vote, the House voted May 7 to hold Lerner in contempt. It wants a U.S. attorney to take steps to force her to testify. (Z: Yes, testify and show America the Republicans are WRONG. GO ahead, Ms Lerner; why not?)
As for Benghazi, at least half a dozen inquiries have probed the terrorist assault of Sept. 11, 2012, generating more than 25,000 pages of documents. Main questions include: Did the Obama administration do enough to get military relief to those under attack? And did it try to mislead Americans about the attack's origins to protect President Barack Obama's record on terrorism with two months left in his re-election campaign?
Opinions mostly fall along partisan lines, although some Republicans express more outrage than others. House Armed Services Chairman Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said the military did what it reasonably could. (Z: WRONG. Most polls say Americans feel Obama and Hillary are lying about this.)
The attack's origins were murky at first. At the time, Egyptians were rioting over an amateur American-made video mocking Islam's prophet Mohammad.
Then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice cited Islamic outrage over the video when she appeared on talk shows the Sunday after the Benghazi attack. Administration officials later said the assault was a calculated terrorist action, not a direct response to the video.
House Republicans have seized on a recently divulged White House "talking points" memo written to help Rice prepare for her TV appearances. The memo said one goal was "to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video and not a broader failure of policy" by the administration.
Republicans say the White House deliberately hid the memo from investigators.
(Z: Well, they didn't present the email, soo... by the way, what about those "talking points" and their motivation? It was pretty clear.)
Many Democrats say congressional Republicans want to injure Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible 2016 presidential candidate, who was secretary of state during the Benghazi tragedy.
Several GOP political strategists said revived inquiries into Benghazi and the IRS will probably do their party more good than harm, provided their lawmakers appear more professional than partisan.
Undecided voters might not get excited about GOP accusations regarding the IRS and Benghazi, said Dan Schnur, a former Republican consultant who teaches political science at the University of Southern California. But given the administration's questionable behavior in both areas, he said, "They certainly don't line up on the other side."
GOP strategist Terry Holt agrees. The Benghazi assault, he said, was "the phone call Hillary Clinton warned us about in 2008 when she was running against Obama. They both blew it."
Democrats are banking on public revulsion.
"To make use politically and financially of the tragedy of the loss of four great Americans is beneath contempt," said Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y. (END OF ARTICLE) (Z: and, you know, Ms Slaughter? Protecting your White House is REALLY "beneath contempt" at the cost of four Americans.)
SO, you see, America. NOTHING the Republicans can do OR SAY is legitimate, according to the Democrats/this author. Get it? NOTHING.
How does this country survive with the misinformation and mischaracterizations in this article and others? We know by now about Ben Rhodes' delayed emails which finally came out and need review! We know Lois Lerner isn't the only one involved in emails that finally were forced to come out! We know CBS's News Department, which I believe hasn't mentioned Benghazi in the last many months and never ran the Ben Rhodes emails!, is run by Ben Rhodes' brother. ABC and CNN have White House connections that are startling, too. How about this author mentioning that?
How DO we get to the bottom of situations like those above, which NEED getting to the bottom of since, in the time since earlier hearings, more evidence has shown up? Just bow to the Democrats and go away?
WOW. What can we do about articles like this? This piece wasn't in a liberal rag that runs all this kind of stuff, it's a Yahoo HEADLINE. And the author has the NERVE to mention FOX above!? REALLY?
Z
