Zip
Weasel Zippers
11/23/2012
But calling Susan Rice “incompetent” is racist or something.
Via NRO:
That didn’t take long. U.N. ambassador Susan Rice has yet to be nominated as secretary of state, but prominent Democrats are already denouncing opposition to her potential nomination as racist on the basis of remarks by Republican senators that she may not be qualified for the job. Would that they had been so sensitive to racial overtones back in 2004, when the African-American nominee for secretary of state, the Republican Ms. Rice, was denounced on the Senate floor and pilloried in racialist cartoons…
Go to Weasel Zippers to read more.
Related: New McCarthyism: ‘WaPo’ Accuses Republicans of Racism to Defend Rice
When I first saw the headline, “The GOP’s bizarre attack on Susan Rice,” I assumed the link would take me to one of the many left-wing columnists employed by the Post. Nope. This is a full-blown Washington Post editorial (and a despicable piece of McCarthyist race-baiting) — the kind you would never expect from the same outlet that so doggedly pursued the Nixon administration’s Watergate cover up…
…as a Cabinet-level official given regular classified briefings, there’s a very good chance Rice knew the truth about Libya being a pre-mediated terror attack before she insisted the complete opposite was true during her Sunday talk show round robin. Therefore, the Post is wrong; Rice did know the information she was giving was false.
If the Post wants to defend that as just doing her job as an “administrative spokeswoman,” that’s their opinion. But there’s plenty of evidence House Republicans are correct and that Rice was in fact “deliberately misleading” the public…
Sen. Graham: Susan Rice Controversy Not About Race But Blood Spilled in Benghazi
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has been a strong opponent of Ambassador Susan Rice’s pending nomination to Sec. of State, and Democrats have tried to derail his opposition by labeling it“racist,” sexist, and indicative of “code words” used by Senators who oppose minorities.
To this point, however, Graham has held his ground. And on Nov. 21 he made it clear that the only color he’s concerned with is the color is “red” — the “red” of “the blood of those who were killed” in Benghazi.
Said Graham: “When [they] can’t answer the question, [they] attack the questioner…my criticism has been about failed foreign policy.” He added that “it would be a terrible thing in America if you couldn’t question and challenge that they did their jobs.”
Moreover, Graham is reminding Democrats that he also wants the resignation of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Chief Counterterrorism Adviser John Brennan. And both of these are white male members of the Obama administration…
House Democrats hurt all women by calling McCain & Graham sexist for Rice criticism
…sometimes, lazy politicians play the S-card just because it is easy to do. The ludicrous accusations of sexism against Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham for criticizing Ambassador Susan Rice actually diminish both real instances of gender bias and inadvertently give McCain and Graham a free pass for actual misdeeds.
According to a dozen Democratic congresswomen, McCain is, in particular, guilty of “clear sexism and racism” because he referred to Rice as “unqualified” and “not very bright.” At a press conference last week, the women accused McCain and Graham of “battering” Rice and “mugging” her character – loaded words that are best left to descriptions of actual violence, not hyperbolic political statements.
Calling political opponents batterers diminishes the real horrors many women suffer at the hands of their domestic abusers – just as calling a political opponent a Communist diminishes the real horrors of those who suffered under Communism.
Words matter, and once words like these begin to get tossed out without any basis, they begin to lose their potency. The next time there is a real instance of sexism or racism, the public may be more likely to dismiss it as just so much political rhetoric.
The irony, of course, is that accusing McCain and Graham of sexism and racism masks the real issue at hand: their rank hypocrisy when it comes to her possible nomination as secretary of state…
President Obama’s silly, sexist defense of Susan Rice by Kirsten Powers.
…It’s absurd and chauvinistic for Obama to talk about the woman he thinks should be Secretary of State of the United States as if she needs the big strong man to come to her defense because a couple of Senators are criticizing her…
Congressman Trey Gowdy To Obama: You Come In Amb. Susan Rice’s Place And Testify
_
_
Update: Of Rice and men, part 2
…It is charitable to see Rice as a fool sent on a fool’s errand. I think she was calculating her own advantage and faithfully serving her master. Even if one thinks her a fool on the larger issues of Obama administration foreign policy, as I do, Rice’s defense of her performance requires something like the willing suspension of disbelief. As to that question Paul has been asking, I infer from Rice’s highly scripted statement that Obama, for one, wants a dupe as Secretary of State.
And from our favorite mad political hack: GOP ‘Got Whiter and More Male’
