Best
160 Comments
Post
  • #125
    !
    Well is anyone surprised? They had already decided that what ever she said, they would not believe her anyway...So I say "the hell with them"...And the Obama Administration should simply go ahead and do what it thinks is best, in terms of nominations, etc.
  • #32
    !
    Let's hope NOT. If this were just 20 years ago, Rice would be in a jail cell. But of course, we live in the new era of lies so we'll never know whom has Stevens killed or why.
  • #52
    !
    @jessejaymes It's been proven she has lied about the entire attack on the embassy. Everything she has stated has been refuted. There was no mob outside protesting some video, the attacks were planned, the killers knew the building and knew where Stevens was. Some sources are stated the man was tortured for some time for information as well. She should be under indictment but of course, Comrade Barky don't play like that. And of course this sorry excuse for a human being is likely our next Secretary of State, a job with apparently quite LOW standards and qualifications. Just another one more bad thing to happen to this nation.
  • #54
    !
    @RobertJHarsh To claim she lied would be to state that she was either there when it happened and knew better or that she was in charge of the embassy and knew better. She was neither. What she did was speak the words of the NSA or some spy/"intelligence agencey that she was told. She did not lie as much as she just parroted what she should have been more aware than to do.
  • #56
    !
    @RobertJHarsh Reagan lied about Iran Contra. Did he go to prison? Bush lied about WMD's. Did he go to prison? Bush I lied about no new taxes (read my lips). Did he go to prison? Nixon lied. Did he go to prison? Clinton lied. Did he go to prison. There is no circumstance in the past 30 years in which what Rice did that anyone has gone to prison for. You're reaching man.
  • #57
    !
    @jessejaymes If that were true, then she's a mouthpiece and that's even worse. You couldn't pay me enough to lie like that and then watch my creditably as a public official get creamed on all the major networks.
  • R Load more replies

  • #30
    !
    @woodtick57 Hiding a silly little fact as to why four men were not given heightened security when Chris Stevens begged for it and predicted his own death...why three people had different answers as to what really happened,
    why the fighting took seven hours and no one came to their aid. Why the President of Egypt was the one to tell
    the US. it was a terrorist attack and not an uprising over a silly movie, why the Commander in Chief "appeared"
    to be the last to know what happened when there is a 24 hr. direct line to the White House, why?..Wake up!
  • #36
    !
    @mimi57

    youve been misinformed or outright lied to. Stevens never asked for extra security for Benghazi. just at Tripoli.

    the military has openly explained the timeline of their response, and it absolutely follows all protocol for such situations.

    Pres ident obama was in no way te last to know anythingg about tis attack. you need better news sources...
  • #44
    !
    @artjeb

    First you have to find even one shhred of evicdence of anythhingg to cover up and wnything they needed to cover up. te wole incident has been pretty open from day one. 9except for te misinformation MIMI has fallen for...)
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    !
    She is only the nominee because she has no problem going in front of national media and lying to the American people. She was probably promised that position after her incredibly ridiculous statements to the media that she made after 9/11/2012.
    I don't really care what McCain and Graham do, but if this woman is selected as our next Sec. of State.... Lord help us.
  • #16
    !
    @woodtick57 Well, let's start with the truth! If you do not know, then say "I don't know". And if you do not know, then why would you schedule 5 interviews on prime time TV to make any statement at all?!?!?!
    She was intentionally instigating propaganda, demagoguery, and inciting negative public opinion against free speech, but only when it offends a Muslim audience.
  • #22
    !
    @Jasonopolis
    nothing in her comments, or any comments made by the administration gave any indication at all of a 'negative public opinion' against free speech.

    Where do you make this stuff up?
  • #28
    !
    @woodtick57 By that statement I can tell that you have no idea what was said or done during those interviews. I do not mind telling you the events as they happened if you missed the whole thing, but when you say things like "where are you making this stuff up" I can conclude that your ability to to be open minded is already compromised.
    The moment that you tell me that you can have an open mind and desire to know the truth about the reality of what is going on is the moment that I would be more than glad to tell you.
  • R Load more replies

  • #14
    !
    Come around? Why would we want that!! I hope they would put the integrity of the office and the welfare of our country before any pressure from the democrats!!!
    Hopefully everyone will agree we need someone we can trust so she won't even be nominated!
  • #8
    !
    No, I don't think that they will "come around", but I do think that they went into that closed door meeting determined to be "more disturbed" for the media when they came back out.
  • #121
    !
    Clearly what happened was that Obama sent her out to run interference for him so he didn't look like the Idiot he really is right before the election. No way that lying robot should be named Secretary of State.
  • #7
    !
    "I am more disturbed now than before," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

    Disturbed by what? This article doesn't contain enough information to answer any questions on the Benghazi issue or Clinton's replacement. Come on, Politix, you can do better.
  • #149
    !
    @1adam2 - That's pure conjecture on your part. Unless you were in the room during this conversation, you don't know any more than the rest of us.
  • #151
    !
    @Denizen_Kate i know a lot more, than any of you care to think about. with your conjecture, accusing me of conjecture.

    the cia, or the secret service, and others does not need to be personally present, in any room to know what is going on. and neither do, i. in my position i may even know, more about it, before they even did.
  • #152
    !
    @1adam2 - now I'm sure you don't know anything. If you were really in the CIA or Secret Service you would never admit it online like that.
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    In political speak this means "we're not going to deal with anything but partisan politics".
    Same as it ever was.
  • #160
    !
    Rice was a 'mind-boggling' choice for UN Ambassador. A 44-year-old Rhodes scholar, Rice was considered a “radical liberal” who favored the use of lightly armed U.N. troops as peacekeepers, Rice and Richard Clarke wrote “Presidential Decision Directive 25”(PDD-25), a controversial Clinton policy document that urged the use of U.N. peacekeepers as surrogates for real military forces in the mistaken belief that warring parties would respect and not fire on lightly armed U.N. forces wearing blue helmets. This policy placed American troops at grave risk by sending them to civil war situations without adequate means to defend themselves. It also led to fiascoes in countries including Rwanda, Haiti, Bosnia, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, as well as in Somalia where the “Blackhawk Down” battle occurred in 1993.

    While working for Clarke, Rice supported the “unconscionable” 1994 Clinton administration decision to prevent the U.N. from taking action against the impending genocide in Rwanda that killed more than 800,000 people, the insider said. Ironically, Rice criticized the Bush administration for not taking stronger action to halt the genocide in Darfur.

    Rice served as the NSC’s Senior Director for African Affairs from 1995 until 1997, when she became Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. In those posts Rice “oversaw extremely inept U.S. policies toward Liberia and Rwanda” and “the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers to Sierra Leone in 1999 who were forced to withdraw shortly after they arrived when rebels stripped them of their clothes and weapons. So as Sectary of State she would be a disaster as well
  • #142
    !
    If barry hussein soetoro chose her, take it to the bank - she's some sort of marxist , socialist, commie , or any other form of the educated elitists that wake up every day looking for another excuse to destroy the very country that gave them that education .
    Likely paid for by the taxpayers.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #131
    !
    McCain doesn't deserve his position in American Politics... I say, Arizona, Get him out of here!! While smart Republicans offer decent proposals, he just spits garbage...
  • #130
    !
    Something is very very wrong with this whole picture!! Ms. Rice at this point has no business 1000 miles near this position!! The whole Bengazi nightmare is MUCH MORE than we know or will ever know. If this was Nixon's time we would already be talking impeachment which I truly believe Obama deserves. Everybody is being thrown under the bus for him and that's why she is his # 1 pick. Only thing is she can't be trusted at all. If the Pubs cave on this ONE they deserve to all be thrown out if office!!
  • #135
    !
    I agree. She stood in front of the bus for Obama and took his fall. For that he promised her Secretary of State. Not too many marbles required to figure that one out - even for a democrat. What is a little amazing is that the libs expect us all to drink from their kool-aid as they deny the obvious.
  • #128
    !
    Unless there is a national disaster Republicans will never say anything good about the Democrats or the administration they choose.
  • #132
    !
    There isn't anything good to say about her!! She lied for Obama, I don't trust her! You have something good to say about her? Go ahead, I'll listen.
  • #137
    !
    @MissMostly She is smart, accomplished, and pretty. That's 3. I don't see where she lied. There is always something nice that can be said about anyone. This is the problem I have with you conservatives there is no civility left in the public arena.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #141
    !
    @Waynestew yes these things you are saying about her are all true, but from my perspective I don't trust that she will do a good job for the American people. She will no doubt do a great job for Obama but that might not be what is best for us. Seems like stories change too much and nothing is just cut and dry. This whole Bengazi thing is a horror story.
  • #143
    !
    @MissMostly Once again I don't know if she lied. And I don't know enough about her to really judge her character. Up until now everyone has said very positive things about her. If you ask me there seems to be a major breakdown in the way intelligence is passed up the chain. Or maybe there is a problem if your name is Rice. (Joke) Condoleezza Rice had communication problems when he came to intelligence in the Bush administration. I find this situation very similar. So I don't see this as a problem with the Democrats or even one or two particular people. There is clearly a problem in the way our intelligence operatives share information. Until this is fixed you will continue to see situations like this no matter who is in the White House.
  • R Load more replies

  • #127
    !
    I suspect that they's be 'troubled' if she had turned water into wine. I can handle them not liking her in a political sense, but they should be honest enough to say that instead of hiding behind hypocrital hypotheses of how she came to say what she did to them before important facts were known with any certainty.
    Thomas Ricks had it right, check it out...
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/26/fox-...
  • R Load more comments...
Post