SUSAN RICE 1, RAND PAUL 0

[DonViejo]

The GOP’s Benghazi scapegoat gets a promotion, and clueless Paul sacrifices his moral authority by lying about her

JOAN WALSH

When ABC News published doctored emails about the development of Benghazi “talking points,” and the White House countered by releasing the originals, which told a very different story, the two versions agreed on at least one fact: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice had nothing to do with the controversial description of the Benghazi attack that she shared in her five fateful Sunday show appearances last Sept. 17.

I thought at the time that Rice deserved an apology from Republicans who savaged her, once the truth about the talking points came out, but of course one never came. (Sen. Lindsey Graham countered by saying she “deserved to be subpoenaed” instead.) Now she’s gotten the next best thing: a promotion to National Security Adviser, once Tom Donilon leaves the job in July. The position needs no confirmation by the Senate, so Rice’s GOP critics have nothing to say about her new role.

Well, nothing to say that makes a difference, anyway. That didn’t stop them from talking. Sen. John McCain was slightly conciliatory, tweeting that while “obviously I disagree w/ POTUS appointment of Susan Rice as Nat’l Security Adviser…I’ll make every effort to work w/ her on imp’t issues.” On the other hand, Sen. Rand Paul insisted it undermined Obama’s “moral authority…to promote basically the person who is guilty of misleading us over the Benghazi tragedy.”

By lying about Rice’s role – she played no part in the behind-the-scenes controversy between the CIA and the State Department over how much and what to say about the attacks – Paul undermines his own moral authority. But lately that’s no impediment to influence within his party. (It’s possible that Paul isn’t smart enough to understand the details of what the Benghazi emails revealed, but that’s not a problem in his party either.)

full article
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/05/susan_rice_1_rand_paul_0/

[pacalo]

1. To the Republicans...

[DavidDvorkin]

2. Rand Paul had moral authority?

Hah!

[jenmito]

3. No, which is why he's naturally running for president in '16. He thinks he gets "street cred" for

saying these stupid things.

[DavidDvorkin]

7. I suppose will get it

But not from enough people to matter. I hope.

[jenmito]

4. K&R&T. n/t

[okaawhatever]

5. It's time for us to get seriously indignant about the refusal of the press to print stories that

reveal the truth about the gop. I want the fairness doctorine back and equal time. The gop can say their crazy lies, but they have to spend as much airtime telling what liars they were. America doesn't know the truth right now and it's one of the most dangerous things to our future.

[AAO]

6. I wish we could make it happen

because I agree how dangerous it is. I just don't know how.