To write it down for all the world to see.
Excellent piece by Victor Davis Hanson on the Petraeus/Benghazi kerfuffe.
While your average Obama voter is basically completely in the dark about what happened in Benghazi, Hanson presents a very plausible “why”; why wouldn’t Obama have supported his ambassador and Americans in foreign lands?
The Obama reelection campaign had established a catchy narrative about foreign policy. “Leading from behind” had rid the world of Qaddafi without the loss of American lives, and had prepped Libya for the arrival of the Arab Spring, which would lead to a postbellum reform government. Barack Obama had killed Osama bin Laden and scattered al-Qaeda, dispelling slurs that he was somehow soft on Islamic terrorism. His reset diplomacy had brought a cool professional approach of quiet competency to foreign policy, consistent with a new lower-profile American posture abroad.
The idea of a preplanned hit by al-Qaeda affiliates on a vulnerable and unprepared American diplomatic post had the potential to shatter that narrative right before the election.
With a depressing prediction:
Where does all this lead?
I think nowhere. Unlike in the cases of Watergate and Iran-Contra, there is no investigative press, given the media’s worry about endangering the second-term agenda of a progressive president.
Ralph Peters noted that Obama has NO CHANCE of being impeached, because absolutely no one wants Joe Biden to be president.
Robert Kagen argues that Republicans’ shouldn’t oppose Susan Rice’s appointment as Secretary of State.
I say this not because I carry a particular brief for Rice. Both she and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the two people most often mentioned for the position, are well-qualified. Were the president to choose either of them, the Senate should vote to confirm.
But the idea that Rice should be disqualified because of statements she made on television in the days after the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, strikes me as unfair. It seems pretty clear now that she based her statements on information the CIA provided at the time. That information proved erroneous, and why the CIA was giving faulty information to senior administration officials remains unclear. I haven’t seen persuasive evidence to support the theory that Rice’s statements were part of a coverup to hide a terrorist attack. The fact that Rice was working from information provided by the CIA would seem to undercut such a theory.
Heh. Susan Rice, you see, was merely reading the script she was giving.
And it would be oh-so-helpful to have such a gullible, useful idiot as Secretary of State.
Yes, by all means. Support her nomination.
Our country is in the best of hands.