Jamie Neely’s Feb. 3 paean to Hillary Clinton shows her distorted view through grievance-colored glasses.
She says Clinton was abused in her Senate testimony on the Benghazi attack because she was a woman, and that she handled it well. Compared to the confirmation hearings of Chuck Hagel days later, Clinton got substantial deference, as she has come to expect. She has always received deference due to her status as “the governor’s wife,” “the president’s wife,” “the betrayed wife,” and for being a woman.
The obvious example is that no senator answered her shouted question “What difference, at this point, does it make?” regarding motivation for the attack. We were in an election campaign in which part of the case for President Barack Obama’s re-election was the decimation of Al Qaeda, and his competence in foreign affairs. They soon knew this was a planned attack by an Al Qaeda affiliate, which counters the argument that Al Qaeda was defeated.
We were caught flat-footed on 9/11, with an unprotected consulate, despite requests for increased security and recent attacks on us and the Brits. The difference it makes, is that the truth speaks poorly of the honesty and competence of Obama and Clinton.