You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
Filters prevent crucial information from reaching senior U.S. leaders.
Simplified, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was created for private businesses to make the higher ups accountable for what happens in the business. They can't just say, 'I wasn't aware of that'. How come that type of accountability can't be applied to the government too?
This article is a red herring from a liberal MSM source to absolve Hillary Clinton of any blame. So it's the fault of bureaucracy. Unfortunately, bureaucracies are made up of people. People have names. Heads of bureaucracies are responsible. Hillary Clinton is the head of the State Department. She is responsible.
I couldn’t put a finger on who Hilary reminded me of, than it hit me, Jeffrey Skilling, ex-CEO of Enron. They both had the same defense.
""This article is a red herring from a liberal MSM source to absolve Hillary Clinton of any blame. So it's the fault of bureaucracy. Unfortunately, bureaucracies are made up of people. People have names. Heads of bureaucracies are responsible. Hillary Clinton is the head of the State Department. She is responsible." @ @ @
And to add: OBAMA is the commander in chief.
HE is ultimately responsible for Hillary's failure, and should also be held accountable.
"I didnt know" isnt a valid excuse for Americans dying.
This is an unbelievable explanation.
B.S. blame Clinton and her liberal cronies. Being afraid with our foreign policy to stop someone from murdering Americans isn't their play book.
For a country childishly hyper-focused on scape-goating and blame, there's plenty of it to go around. In the real world, having 60,000 embassy personnel scattered around the globe has built-in dangers and risks. In the real world, human behavior is unpredictable and erratic. In the real world, no one including God can control every possible scenario on earth. "Blaming" is an immature attempt to insist that someone - anyone- could foresee every possible event, therefore prevent it. Nonsense!! I see Congress's part as far more instrumental in this tragic incident than Clinton's in that it was the GOP Congress who denied the 300 million in funding requested by the State Dept for security. Bottom line, however, is this: blowing this small-scale incident up and trying to paint it as Rand Paul did yesterday as "The worst tragedy since 9/11" is utterly ludicrous and entirely, IMO, the GOP's strategy to discredit the woman who will be president. They want a scandal so very badly in order to reduce her chances of winning in 2016. Too bad this one just isn't it.
In the real world, human behavior is unpredictable and erratic. In the real world, no one including God can control every possible scenario on earth. crystalbay" @ @ @
Well if this is true (And I agree it IS) then why are Liberals trying to ban guns? Are they again trying to control every possible scenario? Stop every mad man? Yes, that is what they are doing. But, here you are using it as an excuse for DOING NOTHING, and calling it just dadny.
Gotta love liberal "logic" and "reasoning"
" Well if this is true (And I agree it IS) then why are Liberals trying to ban guns? Are they again trying to control every possible scenario? "................Clinton tried numerous times to secure funding for better security and was denied by the GOP House. So now they're blaming her for inadequate protection?? How reasonable it that?! As to guns; libs are NOT "trying to ban guns", they are singling out just one type of gun used in the last several massacres. Our generals, police chiefs, and even Colin Powell are all agreeing that these kinds of guns have no place on the streets or in our homes. Implementing universal background checks and a national registry of ownership is what sane adults do when faced with 17,000 gun deaths each year. Just because every scenario leading to a gun death can't be prevented in no way means that we should stand back and do nothing at all. With this irrational notion, we should remove all speed limit & stop signs because, "after all, some people will still speed and run red lights". It makes no sense to simply throw up our collective hands and say, "It's not under our control, so we should do nothing to reduce the violence".
" Being afraid with our foreign policy to stop someone from murdering Americans isn't their play book."....................And who was president when 3000 Americans died? Or 1800 in Katrina?? Or when a CIA agent was outed by Bush cronies??? Why weren't you demanding their resignations?? The double stand here is simply stunning.
As to our foreign relations stance, this woman traveled 1 million miles over four years, met with, engaged, and improved relationships with 132 nations, was solidly aggressive when appropriate, and did an exemplary job of representing the country. How dare you diminish or dismiss the best performance an SOS has done in decades???
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks