The non-debate regarding Susan Rice

| December 11, 2012 | 1 Reply

Glenn Greenwald reports on the lack of meaningful debate regarding Susan Rice:

Virtually all of this debate has concerned Rice’s statements on a series of Sunday news shows in September, during which she claimed that the Benghazi attack was primarily motivated by spontaneous anger over an anti-Islam film rather than an coordinated attack by a terrorist group. Everyone now acknowledges that (consistent with the standard pattern of this administration’s behavior) Rice’s statements were inaccurate, but in a majestic display of intellectual dexterity, progressive pundits claim with a straight face that public officials should be excused when they make false statements based on what the CIA tells them to say, while conservatives claim with a straight face that relying on flawed and manipulated intelligence reports is no excuse.

All of that is standard, principle-free partisan jockeying. It goes without saying that if this were Condoleezza rather than Susan Rice, the two sides would have exactly opposite positions on whether these inaccurate statements should be held against her. None of that is worth examining. But what is remarkable is how so many Democrats are devoting so much energy to defending a possible Susan Rice nomination as Secretary of State without even pretending to care about her record and her beliefs. It’s not even part of the discussion.

Share

Category: Complacency, Media, Orwellian, Secrecy, Warmongering

About the Author ()

Erich Vieth is an attorney focusing on consumer law litigation and appellate practice. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. Erich and his wife, Anne Jay, live in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, where they are raising their two extraordinary daughters.

Comments (1)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. John says:

    Susan Rice is not the story…where was the President during attack. In other words did the Commander In Chief go to bed during what the described during the last debate as a terrorist attack. From the beginning to the attack to the end…where was the President.

    Has the Presidenbt, Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State got back with the families of people killed and explained what actually happened.

    Look at it this way. One of the Seals murdered had “painted” one of the mortar positions with a laser, hoping for help in taking it out…was our President sleeping when our people were desperate for help?

Leave a Reply


Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.