ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Tale of Two Rices

Updated on November 30, 2012
Ambassador Rice on the job at The U.N
Ambassador Rice on the job at The U.N

The Rice Effect

This latest political football or public distraction from the fiscal cliff debacle, is the Rice Effect. Starting at quarterback is Senator John "I Lost The Presidency in 2008" McCain (R-AZ), at fullback is Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and tight-end Kelly Ayotte (R-NH). Despite the fact that this team is totally misguided and creating a distraction from the upcoming fiscal cliff debate.

All of the facts show that US Ambassador to the United Nations didn't have any real pertinent involvement with what happened in Benghazi, Libya at the US Embassy on September 11, 2012. But just like the most recent Republican Presidential Campaign, these specific Senators don't seem to want to be burdened by the actual facts. Ambassador Rice more than likely was a minimum of 6 hours behind the Libyan time zone and several thousand miles away at the time of the incident in question. Those two variables alone should prove beyond a shadow of doubt that she had gotten her Intel from an alternate source. Say from maybe, someone who was there or at the very least closer to the situation as it was happening.

To say that it is absolutely shameless to see how low some Republicans are willing to go to spite President Obama at the drop of a hat, but that would be grossly understating the fact. This smokescreen or distraction that McCain, Graham & Ayotte are causing is a purely venomous Republican response to President Obama being re-elected. This particular distraction is not really relevant because Ambassador Rice hasn't been formally asked if she even wants to be the new Secretary of State when and if Hillary Clinton former US Senator (D-NY) steps down in January 2013 as she's expected to do.

Now with the impending fiscal crisis just beyond the horizon, a normal person probably would or should at least be a bit curious why Senators McCain, Graham & Ayotte aren't concentrating more on that. Rather than what Ambassador Rice said on September 16th while appearing on a few Sunday morning political talk shows. Especially since at the time she stated the information would change as more information becomes available. Is it me or does it appear to be that they are the only Senators publicly blowing this whole situation out of proportion. They're merely trying to present an image of impropriety on President Obama's watch, whether it's fictional or not.

Besides the obvious witch hunt there are no real signs of wrongdoings on ambassador Rice's part for doing the Sunday Morning talk shows with the information that she was given by members of the intelligence community. Their whole case in the nutshell is trying to make it appears as if the White House or President Obama, told her to mislead the America people about what happened during the incident in question. Now they've heard from then CIA Director Petraeus, interim CIA Director Michael Morell, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Susan Rice who confirm that she was given the central talking points by members of the Intelligence community.

With that fact alone it has been said over and over again that she followed the talking points given to her, the specifics of what she actually said on the talk shows then has become a moot point now. It's clearly evident looking back in hindsight that some talking points were incorrect for whatever reason it's all irrelevant, because it was clearly noted then that the information was only a preliminary assessment for what happened there at the time.

If Republican want to talk about blatant lies, fabrications or taking one for the team, then they need only to look back to the G. W. Bush administration. To then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's statement of "the proof of a smoking gun would be in the form of a mushroom cloud", referring to the potential for WMD's in the hands of Iraq's Saddam Hussein. We all know how that ended or shall I say what it lead to. So it's fair to say that there was a miscommunication of facts somewhere between the talking point that she was given and what she actually said on those TV Shows that Sunday morning.

Who really know which edits happened after key members signed off on them are totally besides the point now, because we didn't have clear communications between the parties at the time of the incident in question then. My point is this, in times of chaos especially involving a potentially life threatening crisis, communications are not always as clear and precise as times of serenity. It's an evolving situation that requires time to assess the situation accurately and safely as possible as it's happening.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.