I caught this one on Hot Air originally, and it is fun to watch Marco Rubio eviscerate the narrative laid out by Hillary Clinton, that Benghazi is soooooo yesterday, and represents that tiny distraction issue that only qualifies for, "minor league," political discourse. Rubio however, missed the cheap magician's trick, as I believe most of us on the right are prone to do, especially when it comes to all things Clinton. Just one more comment to make before we proceed to the festivities folks. These Clintons are the best retail and tactical politicians America has ever produced. That skill however, like all things left of center, is based upon nothing more than cheap magic tricks, O.K., great magic tricks, misdirection and slight of hand. We, collectively, as a group who wish to see America survive this progressive assault upon our Constitution, must not allow ourselves to be fooled by the Okey Doke.
This is the first time I've read anything by Noah Rothman. He seems to write well enough to be on one of the web's most influential sites, and his observations are well researched and astute enough for my tastes, but in this case, he's missed the point, as had Senator Rubio. When dealing with Clintons, that can be a deadly combination. Granted, Hillary is no where near as slick as her husband, but if we aren't very careful in how we fight against this woman, we very well may be calling her Madam President one day in our very near future, and that would be a disaster.
From the Hot Air article linked to above:
Hillary Clinton has a Benghazi problem, and she knows it.
She knows that a majority of Americans, according to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, support the formation of a congressional select committee to investigate the attacks. In spite of Team Hillary’s strategy of casting anyone who is concerned about the deaths of three American servicemen and a U.S. ambassador as a harebrained conspiracy theorist, only 42 percent said they believed the attack has been investigated enough. That same survey showed that only 38 percent of adults approve of how Clinton handled that incident and its aftermath.
Clinton’s Benghazi problem is part of what led her to prominently feature the September 14, 2012, casket ceremony at Andrews Air Force Base on her book’s back cover art. Clinton’s Benghazi problem is also what led her to make a series of flippant and dismissive statements to ABC’s Diane Sawyer about that attack. It’s all part of a critical effort to reclaim the narrative surrounding her response to that deadly attack.
When asked by Sawyer if the Benghazi probe would deter a White House bid, Clinton replied that it has made her even more inclined to run in order to prove a point. “Actually, it is more of a reason to run because I do not believe our great country should be playing minor league ball,” she insisted. “We ought to be in the majors. And I view this as really apart from, even a diversion from the hard work that the Congress should be doing about the problems facing our country and the world.”
Asked to respond to those comments on Tuesday on CBS News’ This Morning, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) exploited the obvious opening that Clinton’s strategy has created. Coldly, soberly, dispassionately, Rubio charged Clinton with an insufficient concern about threats to American national security.
“The State Department had at its disposal a steady stream of reporting about how dangerous – how much danger that facility in Benghazi was in,” Rubio began. “It is a fact they did not take sufficient security measures, and it is a fact that perhaps it shouldn’t have even been there, and it is a fact it should not have been there and it is a fact they did not have an extraction plan in place that was sufficient.”
“If she thinks it’s something we shouldn’t focus on, then perhaps that gives insight as to why it happened in the first place,” Rubio added, delivering the coup de grâce.
Did you catch it, the misdirection? Hillary wants this all talked out now, so that in two years time, we won't be having a discussion about the very real issue that we should be concerning ourselves with. This whole Benghazi thing is not about this one failure, but the fact that this one failure, as horrific as it was, is only part of a larger failure. Benghazi was the only possible result of implementing The Kumbayah school of foreign policy in the first place. Let's explore this a bit, as my keen Spidey Sense tells me that you're pulling away a bit.
We'll start here. Nothing Hillary says is unscripted. Bill may be allowed to stray from the script and ad lib, but not Hillary. There's no question as to who the brains in that operation happens to be, and who is the worker bee. Hillary has canned responses programmed for each of her turns at any microphone, and if the question does not fit exactly, she'll pivot until it does. This woman has not said anything spontaneous since the Hindenburg went down, and this interview, along with her, "what difference at this point does it make," jaw droppingly brash comments at the original Benghazi lie fest are certainly no exception to that rule. Kudos to the low level dweeb who wrote this material for her, he or she must certainly be on the Clinton short list for promotion and subsequent self sacrifice for the cause.
Hillary does know that this isn't going away, but she is not trying to remove it from the public discourse. Quite to the contrary, she and her husband both want us talking about blast walls, security contingents, escape plans, response times, anything really except for why the embassy was attacked in the first place. On day one of Hillary's stint as our nation's top diplomat, she signaled to the world that America was ready to repent for unfairly being the world's lone super power. That Mattel Toy Reset Button signaled to each and every one of our enemies that standing still and taking what ever they wished to dish out to us would be taken, and that we'd simply say, "thank you sir, may I have another." Barack Obama's famed Cairo Speech, broadcast to the world, was the beginning of an apology tour that saw us saying, "I'm sorry," to every tin pot thug hanging out in the worst toilets the third world has produced to date. Projecting American Weakness became our official position on every crisis faced by the world at large. Does, "leading from behind," sound familiar? I understand that a group of linguists from MIT are still attempting to decipher the Obama Doctrine. They needn't bother, gibberish will always be gibberish.
It is no coincidence that attacks upon American interests bloom like wild fire, literally, when ever Democrats are in the White House. Their entire foreign policy philosophy reminds me of the time hippy neighbors attempted the great Summerhill experiment of 1972. Every child in the neighborhood spent two entire days running into the hippy household and leaving with handfuls of candy completely unchecked, all convinced that Matty's parents had finally gone completely nuts. To their credit, the flirtation with Summerhill only lasted a day or two. Not so with Democrats and their beliefs. When Hillary asked, "what difference at this point does it make how they died," I was massively disappointed that not one of the people doing the questioning found the adequate answer, which was this. "The difference Madam Secretary, was that their deaths could have been easily prevented by taking smarter actions two years ago, when this suicidal foreign policy was enacted. The slightest embrace of America's strength as a positive thing for the world as a whole, and not viewing that reality as a problem to be solved, would have prevented our embassies the world over from becoming fire wood during the entirety of 2012."
Hillary knows exactly what she is doing here, and make no mistake about it, so long as we only take issue with her straw man arguments, and not her vision as a whole, she's won. When asked for a specific accomplishment while serving as our Secretary of State, Hillary offered this missive. "I've restored America's stature in the diplomatic community, and our friends like us again." That statement is really a knee slapper when one considers the fact that the whole conversation is centered around four of our citizens being dragged from an embassy in the first place. This entire discussion is most certainly not the stuff one who is witnessing America's improved world stature would expect to be having, ever.
If Hillary can keep the conversation on her idiotic premise that President's can't be concerned with small issues like the placement of blast walls and such, then we won't be talking about the small fact that her plan is to continue the very foreign policy that fomented the situation we faced in Benghazi to begin with. I am by no means ready for Hillary, and neither is America, should America wish to prosper. Keep this in mind, Hillary will not be easy to defeat. She and her husband are formidable foes to say the least. They are masters at framing the debate in a way that benefits their own narrative. They are also expert at knowing which shots they can take, and which ones are lethal, and more importantly, how to avoid the latter. If we are to stand a chance at preventing a Hillary Presidency, we must learn to fight on the real issues, and not on the silly crap that she positions as the real issues.
In that respect anyhow, I guess she is right, her comments do represent the minor leagues. Let's drag her cheap magic trick pulling a** up to the majors. Let me leave you with this exit quotation from Thomas Sowell's latest piece of brilliance.
We may yet become the first nation to die from a terminal case of frivolity. Other great nations in history have been threatened by barbarians at the gates. We may be the first to be threatened by self-indulgent silliness inside the gates.