It was a tough day for McCain, Ryan and others on the Sunday shows ~ here's the first confrontation of a few ~ could it be that the media has reached a tipping point with the unending GOP/TP dishonesty/duplicity/fantasy? ~ Sooz

McCain Goes After NBC Host For Questioning GOP’s Benghazi Conspiracy Theories
By Zack Beauchamp on Feb 17, 2013 at 11:49 am

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) levied a series of wild accuastions Sunday morning when discussing the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi last September, accusing the Obama Administration of perpetrating a “massive coverup” and NBC’s David Gregory of not caring about the death of American diplomats.

McCain’s outburst came after Gregory asked McCain what, exactly, the Administration was covering up. Taking umbrage at Gregory’s skepticism, the Arizona senator grew confrontational:



Watch it:



As Gregory suggests, it’s not exactly clear what McCain thinks is being covered up. Both the lack of immediate military response to the attack on the consulate and the matter of UN Ambassador Susan Rice’s “talking points” on the attack were clearly explained several months ago. Nevertheless, McCain’s colleague Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has threatened to put a hold on the confirmation of the President’s nominees for both Secretary of Defense and CIA Director until he gets “the truth” on Benghazi.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/02/17/1605121/mccain-goes-after-nbc-host-for-questioning-gops-benghazi-conspiracy-theories/

Here's the Ryan confrontation ~ who does Ryan look like to you [albeit with darker hair] on the clip below? ~ Sooz

ABC News Calls Out Paul Ryan For Hypocrisy Over Looming Budget Cuts
By Igor Volsky on Feb 17, 2013 at 11:02 am

ABC News’ Jonathan Karl confronted Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) over his past support for the sequester, just as the one-time GOP vice presidential candidate sought to blame President Obama for the automatic across-the-board cuts scheduled to go into effect on March 1.

During an appearance on This Week, Ryan argued that President Obama “proposed the sequester” and hasn’t “put any details out there” to offset it. “We are here because the president back in the last session of Congress refused to cut spending in any place and therefore we wound up with the sequester,” Ryan insisted. But Ryan hasn’t always opposed the automatic cuts.

As Karl pointed out, when Congress was debating the Budget Control Act in August of 2011, Ryan supported the framework and urged his fellow Republicans to vote for the sequester:


Watch it:



Ryan’s argument is fundamentally dishonest, as he is one of the Republicans responsible for creating the sequester in the first place. In the summer of 2011, Republicans demanded spending cuts to offset a debt ceiling increase and refused to consider new revenues in those negotiations. That standoff produced the Budget Control Act, which Ryan voted for and promoted. The law included spending caps and a devastating sequester as a way to motivate a bipartisan Super Committee to find $1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

After the Super Committee failed to agree on a spending reduction package, Ryan — then the GOP’s vice presidential candidate — consistently railed against the sequester mechanism he previously supported, calling it “reckless” and “devastating.” Two months later, he wants the sequester to go into effect and may incorporate its savings in his upcoming budget.

Ryan tried to end his interview with Karl on a high note, presenting himself as a lawmaker above the fray. “Actually, Jonathan, you’ve known me a long time, and the one thing you know about me is I don’t play that [political] game,” he said in response to a question about whether or not he’s positioning himself for a presidential bid in 2016, adding, “I don’t talk like that.”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/02/17/1604991/abc-news-calls-out-paul-ryan-on-hypocrisy-over-looming-budget-cuts/

He looks like the second Darren on Bewitched.

McCain, for as long as I can remember, has always seemed belligerent, confrontational, and short-tempered with occasional flashes of "statesmanship" ~ but all three negative traits have obviously taken over since his loss to Obama ~ for me, this comment rings true: "... McCain, whose capacity has deteriorated sharply in recent years ..." ~ ~ Sooz

McCain lost in a fog of partisan rage
By Steve Benen - Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:35 AM EST

Looking back at the tragic and deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last fall, we know quite a bit about what happened. We also know, thanks to an independent investigation, that "Republican charges of a cover-up" were "pure fiction."

But as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) argued yesterday, he can't be bothered with facts -- he has a partisan vendetta to pursue.

[Sooz comment: video clip accessible via end link]

For those who can't watch clips online, "Meet the Press" host David Gregory pressed the Republican senator on the unsubstantiated charge that the Obama administration has engaged in a "massive cover-up." Gregory asked a simple question: "A cover-up of what?"

McCain, just a few days after explaining how important it is not to be "disagreeable," became unusually belligerent, asking the host whether he cares about the deaths of four Americans.

Gregory tried to get an answer anyway, responding, "You said there is a cover-up. A cover-up of what?" McCain, unable to think of anything substantive, said, "Of the information concerning the deaths of four brave Americans."

Even for McCain, whose capacity has deteriorated sharply in recent years, this was a pathetic display.

Remember, McCain has had several months to think about this. He's sat through classified and unclassified briefings. He's participated in a series of congressional hearings. He's (presumably) read the results of independent investigations, and had his own questions answered, verbally and in writing.

And yet after all of this, McCain is not only ignorant of the basics, he doesn't understand his own conspiracy theory. The senator, after pondering the issue since September, still believes there's an elaborate "cover-up," but doesn't know why he thinks this.

The exchange on "Meet the Press" wasn't awkward; it wasn't bizarre; it was alarming.

This was the point at which it might have dawned on everyone watching, including journalists who still consider the senator as credible on foreign policy and national security, "Good lord, John McCain has no idea what he's talking about."

I hate to be a stickler for such things, but as a rule, when the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee accuses the White House on national television of orchestrating a cover-up as part of a terrorist attack, it's not too much to ask that the senator have some idea what he's talking about.

But in this case, McCain is simply lost in a fog of his own partisan rage. At this point, the man doesn't understand what he doesn't understand, and worse, he just doesn't care. McCain no longer thinks it matters that he can't back up his accusations; he simply wants to keep making them. And if you press him for details he should understand, the increasingly unhinged senator will suggest you're indifferent to the deaths of Americans at terrorists' hands.

Why? Because he's John McCain.

Incidentally, this was McCain's fourth Sunday show appearance of the new year -- that's four appearances in seven weeks -- which suggests he'll have another opportunity to answer similar questions in a national setting very soon.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/18/17003957-mccain-lost-in-a-fog-of-partisan-rage?lite

I was thinking Alfred E. Newman, of Mad Magazine fame ~

Sooz

Alfred E Newman is what I was going to say! I had to hide my copies of Mad magazine from my Dad--i think he was afraid I was going to grow into a liberal or something! Funny: my Mom was a "closet" liberal and I don't think Dad ever knew it!