Want to know why the Right is losing one argument after another, even though time-and-time-again their facts and logic are irrefutable? Consider this…
Breitbart.com Headline: “Clinton Blames Bush For Lack of Funds to Secure Benghazi”
During a Fox-Greta Van Susteren interview, the article’s first line stated “..outgoing Secretary of State Clinton continued the theme that, during the Bush Administration, requests for monies from Congress to secure…consulates were rejected.”
Falling for the bait, the Breitbart journalist goes on the defensive in the article, citing a Deputy Assistant Secretary’s testimony in October stating money wasn’t the issue, and that Republican lawmakers had pointed out the State Department had spent millions on non-security issues over the past few years.
But the Breitbart journalist (Dr. Susan Berry) misses a HUGE point…
During the Bush Administration’s last 2 years, the Congress which ‘rejected requests for monies’ from the State Department…was DEMOCRAT-controlled!
Think that might be an important point? Why doesn’t Breitbart think so?
We’ve written earlier BCP blogs discussing the critical issue of challenging the premise of arguments put out by the opposition party, yet even an admirable organization like the Breitbart news group commits a major sin of omission.
Clinton’s clever positioning of ‘the Bush Administration’ before mentioning ‘Congress’ implies a GOP-controlled funding mechanism, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
Congress controls the money; Democrats controlled Congress. Yet, goes unmentioned.
Citing a low-level flunky’s testimony and poor Department spending priorities is weak stuff, compared to a pivotal fact that the Congress controlling State Department funding was being run by Democrat majorities in both the House and the Senate.
When strong arguments can be made, seizing the narrative is critical!
(We never thought it would be necessary to remind Breitbart of that fact.)