Bridging involves some intellectual honesty on both sides. So here goes a conflict exercise. The first place I posted it, did not get a single conservative response, but I will try again here.
Compare the respective White House handling of two situations I give my own labels to:
A) Insurgency-gate: from the end of the US invasion of Iraq May 1st 2003 until at least November 2003 and later, President Bush was still saying “this is not an insurgency” even though there was increasing violence on an insurgency scale . The insurgency reflected the complete lack of an occupation strategy from the Deparment of Defense, against the strong advice of US Army Chiefs. As was the catastrophic decision to disband the Iraqi Army on May 23 2003, almost at a stroke causing the insurgency. And the cost of the consequent failure to admit and deal with the insurgency for political reasons was 4400+ US and 100,000s of Iraqis deaths.
B)Benghazi-gate. For about ten days after the death of 4 Americans in the Benghazi consulate, the Obama White House was not acknowledging/denying that this was an “act of terror”. The presence of the US Ambassador in the consulate without strong military protection was undoubtedly a significant security error. But there were no consequent fatalities as a result of the ten day denial of an act of terror. And apart from the security mistake, the “act of terror” was not triggered by US decisions in contrast to the insurgency.
PS Imagine in making this comparison: Insurgency-gate was with a Democrat in the White House and Benghazi-gate with a Republican in the White House to assist in objectivity. Imagine you head a board of inquiry into both situations. Feel free to comment on my factual characterization with counter data.