Benghazi and America's distracted citizenry

We keep hearing that the Benghazi scandal is only in its early stages, and that when all the facts come out, it could bring down the Obama administration. Scary stuff, eh? Well, I have news for you: It doesn't matter how much more information comes out – including information that leads directly to Barack Obama – there will be no serious consequences to the biggest political cover-up in modern American history. Please quote me on that.

Rep. Darrell Issa made this clear when he recently said that it was important to find out exactly what happened in Benghazi "so policies can be put in place that will prevent it from ever happening again." Wow! That Darrell fellow sure is tough: "Put policies in place that will prevent it from ever happening again?"

Prevent what from ever happening again? Obviously, Issa wasn't talking about preventing a future cover-up. Clearly, he was referring to putting policies in place to prevent another U.S. ambassador from being killed by terrorists. No mention of impeachment, no mention of indictments, no mention of even a slap on the wrist. Just "put policies in place that will prevent 'it' from ever happening again." It's right up there with Hilla the Hun's shouting, "What difference does it make?"

Can you imagine the laughter behind closed doors when Obama and his sleazy Marxist cohorts hear stuff like this? There is nothing that brings about thundering guffaws from those on the far left like the words and actions (or nonactions) of their favorite human species – the Useful Idiotalia Phylum, which consists of humanoids with microscopic brains who pay homage to their slave masters.

The truth is that everyone is making this whole affair much too complicated. As I have repeatedly said, where Obama is trapped in the Benghazi scandal is that he insisted, in his final debate with MittMan, that the day after the attack he called the Benghazi killings a terrorist attack.

TRENDING: North Korea deports runaway U.S. soldier after he broke the law there

Forget that he was talking in general terms when he used the term "terror." When CNN moderator Candy Crowley, addressing Romney, said, "He did, in fact, sir, call it an act of terror," the Smart-Aleck-in-Chief quickly interjected, "Can you say that a little louder, Candy?" That's right, he arrogantly demanded credit for calling Benghazi a terrorist attack because it was helpful to him at the time.

The moment Obama made that wisecrack, the Benghazi cover-up was unveiled. But today, neither Republicans nor pseudo-conservatives in the media get it. In fact, they still argue the opposite – that Obama did not refer to Benghazi as a terrorist attack. Big mistake.

If Obama himself was bragging that he called the Benghazi attack "an act of terror," I say give him what he wished for. Then, only one question is relevant: Why did he (perhaps through a subordinate, but it was Barack Obama who gave the order) direct Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to appear on five major television shows and unequivocally state that the Benghazi attack had nothing to do with terrorism and that it was, in fact, a result of a "spontaneous demonstration" over an anti-Islamic online video?

In his newest book, Robert Ringer goes to bat for the most maligned and beleaguered individuals in America. Don't miss "The Entrepreneur: The Way Back for the U.S. Economy"

Only Republicans would allow America's No. 1 enemy to have it both ways. If it was a terrorist attack – as Obama insisted it was during the CNN debate – Republicans should relentlessly remind everyone of what he said. Then put Susan Rice and Hilla the Hun under oath and grill them unmercifully until they give the names – repeat, names – of those who directed them to spread the video lie on five major Sunday shows.

Right now, the best the Dirty Dems have been able to come up with as a defense is to have Jay Carney brush the whole thing aside as "old news." That's right, poor Jay Carney, looking as though he's about to break into tears while simultaneously wetting his diapers, no longer sees the need to defend what happened, because it's "old news." And he's right, because the average disinterested American doesn't have a long enough attention span to ask the question, "But what does the fact that it's old news have to do with explaining what happened?"

Plus, Carney insists that the whole thing is just politics. Note to Jay: Everything that happens in Washington is politics! So, again, it's something that is not relevant to answering the question.

The sad truth is that neither BHO nor Hilla need to worry about a serious investigation into the Benghazi cover-up so long as useful idiotalia Johnny Boehner has their backs. Boehner, of course, continues to insist that a select committee to investigate the Benghazi affair is unnecessary because it hasn't "risen to that level." Sounds eerily similar to Geraldo Rivera's favorite line, "It doesn't rise to the level of impeachment." What a splendid couple Johnny and Geraldo would make if they ever decided to run off to Brazil together and set up housekeeping.

Boehner, in fact, insisted that such a committee would be a waste of time and money. Note to Johnny: Everything Congress does is a waste of time and money!

With no serious effort being made to get to the bottom of the Benghazi cover-up, it's quite easy for the Master of Distraction to have Republicans foaming all over themselves, chasing down irrelevant information to avoid zeroing in on the fact that he himself wanted credit for calling Benghazi a terrorist attack long before Susan Rice was sent out to tell a totally different story on five major talk shows.

Fortunately, the bodacious boy wonder in the White House doesn't have to worry about the truth coming out about a mundane issue like Benghazi, because he knows he can count on circus fare like "Ice Road Truckers," "Ax Men" and "Swamp People" to keep the citizenry distracted. And you wonder why they call this a great country?