I think it is very unfortunate the way we run these peoples names into the
ground and yes that applies to people in both parties. Having said that and
knowing it will not happen I still beleive Huntsman would should at least be
considered as an option.
@TolstoySince it seems like Obama will nominate Republican Chuck Hagel to
Secretary of Defense, I have a feeling he won't appoint Democrats to both.
Then again, his long-expected backup of Kerry has a bit too much approval from
Republicans who personally I believe railroaded Rice just so Obama can pick
Kerry and allow Scott Brown to have another shot at a senate seat.
" .... I think it is very unfortunate the way we run these peoples names
into the ground ..."Tolstoy - Susan Rice, all by her
lonesome, ran her own name into the ground. Place the "blame" where it
belongs.Susan Rice was thrown under the bus by Obama when he
instructed her to lie to the American public about what went down in Benghazi.
She was dumb enough to follow his orders - this is why she is not qualified to
be secretary of state, and she knows it. The heat in the kitchen finally got too
high, and she got out of the kitchen. The American public is not stupid.
Does this mean we will finally know the truth about 9/11? I doubt it. We will
probably never know the truth about this or the true election results until
after we have passed on from this life. Sad that what Obama said would be a
transparent government with no secrecy will come to be known as the
administration of secrets and lies.
Attempts to paint Republicans as sexist and racist for opposing Susan Rice are
truly despicable (Republicans had the fist black women named Rice for Secretary
of State)Susan Rice sullied her own name when she went on the TV
circuit spreading lies to obfuscate BenghaziI am sure Obama was
smart enough to see the writing on the wall and knew that if he nominated Rice -
Benghazi would be in the news all over again (and this time he may not be able
to bury it in a lapdog press)By getting Rice to play the martyr and
withdraw her own name; He can further bury his foreign affairs incompetence and
continue with the race and gender warfare that seems to have served him well.
At least she was a hundrd times better in the UN than John Bolton!
I can understand Rice spouting White House instructions for a day or two, but
after that she would have to be pretty dumb not to realize what was going on in
Libya. I would rather have her than Kerry at the job.
There has to be other hidden baggage here as well. The Benhazi scandal is
nothing outside of Fox Noise and the few tin foiled hats who follow it. BO does
not want a fight on such a meaningless appointment. He has a few Supreme Court
appointments coming up and a fiscal cliff prior to the mid terms. The way the
GOP is going they're going to hand Congress to the lib's and BO will
spend his last 2 years in office cramming his agenda down the throat of the 1%.
Tom in CA and Counter Intelligence have it exactly right. As far as the remark
about John Bolton. Bolton knows more about foreign affairs than Obama and Rice
Of course it was the fault of the process. Of course it was. Of course it was.
Hmm, I cannot even convince myself of that baloney. It wasn't
anyone's fault but Obama, who gave approval for the lies, and Ms. Rice who
took one for the ol' gipper. That's what happens when you are loyal
Reality strikes the president. Rice is a smart lady derailed by the lure of
politics. She is not qualified to serve the country because she serves only her
First, why did Obama trot out Susan Rice (The U.S. ambassador to the U.N.) to
all the networks with a story that was an obvious lie? Rice is not to fault
here, except she didn't have the character to tell Obama no--she should
have. What in the world was she doing this for anyway? She's the wrong
person and she had nothing to do with Benghazi. She was a sacrificial lamb.
Still, I have no respect for someone who agrees to go before television cameras
on national TV and tell the same lie to every news station. She is categorically
unqualified to represent this country in any capacity.Second, the only
person who is really culpable in this whole Benghazi mess is the president of
the United Stated, yes, the liar in chief, he gave that order to Susan Rice, he
dictated the message, and he should resign for this deliberate lie. But, alas,
the press protects him, the Democrats protect him, and nobody wants the truth
anyway; we certainly will not get it from this administration.
Obama requested that she withdraw her name from consideration. Does that
indicated that he is racist?
@FT "The Benhazi scandal is nothing outside of Fox" You are correct as
far as the media is concerned who is in fact in Obamas front pocket. You are a
real piece of work to refer to the Bengazi scandal as nothing. In addition to
the Ambassador two of my veteran brothers died in that fiasco. If one of those
brave warriors was your son would Bengazi still be nothing.We have gotten from
Obama the same as we got from Fast and furious. Stonewalling just short of
Executive privledge. One question. Have you ever served your Country? I doubt
mohokat,Don't worry when the left trots out their disdain for Fox. It
just means they have no counter-argument, so they fall back to their favorite
foil.Tolstoy,I believe the name dragging in the mud started
with the Bork nomination.CI,House dem women - that would
include queen nancy who would not know the truth if it bit her - and Maxine
Waters ('nuf said there) - there is less credibility there than in the
North Korean press
After sullying the honor of 4 Americans that gave their lives for this country
with her political spin and lies I am relieved that this woman removes herself
for consideration.Maybe others will think twice before selling their
political souls and personal integrity in government service.We can
She sealed her fate when she went on 5 networks and spouted the President's
words verbatim for all the world to hear. Then she said she only gave what
intelligence reports told her to say. Intelligence, means smart people in this
case, did not even come close to saying those words, especially 5 days after the
incident. Then to go on the networks and state the obvious, NOT, and be the
errand runner for the administration when the President or Secretary of State
Clinton should have been the targets for the message errata. Those
two lacked the courage to say what they told Ms. Rice to say. She did her duty
but when you don't tell the truth, it comes back to bite you, sooner and in
this case later. The President got his second term and Ms. Rice will get some
prize for her job on television. What a shame that we might end of
with John Kerry, who has his own backlog of problems starting with his medal
throwing incidents and demeaning actions for and about the military. His
campaign also has items that surfaced that will impact on his appointment,
either Defense or State.
This is politics. Pure and simple. The story has been told hundreds of times
before, just the names of those who play it change. Our country losses the
chance of having another well educated, loyal patriot serve at the expense of
the country club boys playing in the beltway. Ms. Rice will be o.k., finding
other ways to serve her country. Just put her name along so many other
casualites of politics (e.g. Bork).
@tom in ca"...Susan Rice was thrown under the bus by Obama when
he instructed her to lie...".You were there. You heard the
instructions.Or you're just making it up.People who
make stuff up are liars...Even in Cailfornia.
@FT"Our country losses the chance of having another well
educated, loyal patriot serve at the expense of the country club boys playing in
the beltway."There was nothing well educated or loyally
patriotic about Susan Rice's opening statement on Meet the Press on 9/16.
The statement was contrary to what everyone else knew. So why didn't she
know it? Whether or not she was given bad intel, the fact of the matter is that
everyone else knew, if not an incompetent intelligence community (which by the
way they are denying), that this was no spontaneous attack. Whether she was told
to say what she said or not, this makes her looks incredibly incompetent and
unfit for duty in such a high position of trust and confidence.
To MohoKatWhere is your concern for the over 4000 American Soldiers
killed in Iraq due to lies by Bush/Cheney and your hero Condalisa Rice? John
Bolton may have a lot of foriegn policy experince, but he never used in in the
UN! There is not a country out there he did not offend during his Post! He was
also never confirmed as the UN Ambassador by Congress! He was an off session
appointment because he never would have been confirmed due to his lack of
integrity and morals!
WHAT NOW?Saint George, UTNo, I wasn't there. Here in California we learn that 2 plus 2 equals 4. All I did was connect the
dots. And it didn't take long to figure it out. No lies here.
non believer,There is a huge difference between Iraq and Benghazi.
First off, few people opposed the conventional wisdom that Iraq had WMD, as per
the intelligence reports of the time (which by the way is not lying, it's
just bad intel, even if really bad intel). And Barack Obama, to his credit, went
against the grain on this issue. In the case of Benghazi, on the other hand,
EVERYONE BUT the Obama Administration knew that Benghazi was a terrorist attack,
yet they (the Administration) chose to treat it as a spontaneous movement.
Second, even though a good majority in Washington initially rode the invade Iraq
bandwagon, they quickly abandoned ship when it didn't work out leaving Bush
and his inner circle to bear the criticism. The media crucified Bush and his
associates for the extremely costly war. There has been no such criticism from
the media for the total debauchery that Benghazi turned out to be. Third, we
know why 4,000 troops died in Iraq. Bad intel. Why are there two dead Navy SEALs
and a dead ambassador? After all this time, the Administration utterly refuses
to tell us anything.
atl134Salt Lake City, UT"Republicans who personally I believe
railroaded Rice"Yeah. Those darn Republicans. Never mind that H.
Clinton didn't want Rice as SOS. And did you read what Maureen Dowd had to
say about her? And the NY Times? (among others). It would have been
so easy for Obama to submit her name to the Senate, and THEN when the
Republicans kept her from being confirmed, Obama could have gotten a lot of
mileage out of it (those pesky, racist Republicans). It was
Rice's own party that, in the final analysis, railroaded Rice. That's
why her name was pulled.
Those sexist racist Republicans railroaded Susan Rice out of this position.Those same sexist racist Republicans also nominated and confirmed Colin
Powell, and Condolessa Rice to that same position. Darn those Republicans.
Seriously folks, you are judging Susan Rice's whole career by an appearance
on a Sunday talk show? Do you have any idea about her credentials, education,
job experience? She is a well respected international diplomat who draws praises
from conservatives as well as liberals. This is one of the things wrong with
America these days. We have a quick mob mentality fed by the internet, talk
radio and a 24 hour news cycle. We spent several years investigating 9/11 and
the causes that led to that tragedy before drawing sound conclusions. The
Benhahzi incident is a few months old, the investigation is in its inital stages
yet conservative talking heads seem to know all the facts. The only fact any
logical person can conclude at this point in time is her decision to withdrawl
from consideration is political. Politics aside, I want our most qualified to
serve in our military and state departments. We only need to look back to the
2nd Gulf War to remind ourselves what happens when we leave important decisions
up to idealogues.
The whole position is ridiculous but I don't think it's sexist and
racist. It's completely political. There were riots, there is terrorism.
There were riots at the time so why is that hard to believe? You're just
being weak minded puppets to actually believe the republican excuse for wanting
Rice out.They want John Kerry to get the position so it opens up a
Senate position they think they can get.
Maureen Dowd in the NYT made the strongest argument against Susan Rice. When
that comes from the left, it is hard to blame the right wing or politics.
Intelligence is not the issue. Rice is simply not qualified by way of
temperament or integrity.
Owl-she may not be qualified but letting the process play out would be wise.
We'll never know, we won't have time to judge her qualifications
because of politics (both left and right). I certainly don't view Maureen
Dowd as a credible source. Our system is corrupt, influenced by money. Our
Senators are life long dependents of the public dole and as Americans we have
become complacent to think this is o.k.. Corporations are the new Kings and our
Congress their servants. Susan Rice was just another pawn in the game of
Good news to hear.
She may be qualifieid, but the Benghazi criticism is serious and important--it
remains an open wound that needs proper dressing. That clearly hasn't
happened yet. If Obama wants to make progress in this particular station, he
needs to choose someone that was not affiliated with that whole fiasco.
Otherwise it's seen as though he's rewarding their own fumbles.