Hi 40° | Lo 25°

Letter: They’re using Ayotte

I once gave my son a poster with a picture of the back of a zebra. The caption said, “If you’re not in the lead, the view is always the same.”

I feel I should send one to Sen. Kelly Ayotte, always the faithful party follower, available at any time to stand behind folks like Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

This issue about Ambassador Susan Rice is a personal one for Senator McCain, who can’t get over the 2008 election that he lost to then-Sen. Barack Obama and who remembers some of the things Rice said about him during the heat of the campaign. He’s been an angry person ever since.

These men are using Ayotte, who always appears ready to be in the news. I would like to ask Ayotte to please go back to her office and do some work for the people on the budget issues that are critical to this nation. The larger issue of the Libya embassy attack will be given a rightful airing before Congress and the nation.



Legacy Comments6

She's paying her dues to the party, building a record of going along, so she can move up to run for VP. We all said it when she was first elected -- she was going to put herself in the hands of party handlers, because she is so out of her depth. Lo, it has come to pass. Nobody is, nor should be, surprised. If she falters in her toadying, she will hit that old glass ceiling, and have to accept that pretending to be one of the GOP old, white guys only goes so far. So, like McCain, she MUST make something out of this Susan Rice non-issue. Since Rice had NOTHING to do with Benghazi, the only conspiracy available to the GOP pushers is that the White House messed with the talking points to avoid political embarrassment before the election? That necessarily and falsely assumes that voters would have turned away from Obama is they knew two weeks earlier than they did that Al-Quaeda sympathizers may have been involved in the attack. Now, that IS a stretch.

This is not about who said what, even though it went on for like 5 weeks. The issue here is more serious. Why were the folks denied more security over and over? Is it incompetence? if it is than we should be worried about all security. The sad part about all of this is the fact that folks are willing to accept not holding anybody accountable for the state dept or anybody else not doing their job. That includes Hillary Clinton. She is being protected. We saw this with Fast & Furious also. There seems to be a pattern here of incompetence. Rice was also involved years back in some bombings in Africa when she was assistant secretary. She also has conflict of intrests with her investments. Yet the fans of the American idol president attribute all of this to politics. Very dangerous.

The unmitigated gall! ANGELA BELL asks Ayotte to "please go back to her office and do some work for the people on the budget issues that are critical to this nation." If only the Democrats in the senate would pass a budget, Ayotte would. Its been 4 years now Angela...go bark up Jeannie Shaheenie tree.

Wow. It amazes me how the left continues to look the other way. Conservative women are always trashed by the left. I recall the names Condi Rice was called. Ambassador Rice's record is there. As are all her investments which many believe are a conflict of intrest. Hillary Clinton is being protected so she can run in 2016. Did we get the facts about Fast & Furoius? This will play out as a coverup. But no top official will take the fall. Some low ranking employee will take the fall for the incompetence of this admistration.

But have another Black American women named Rice get up before Congress and swear that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction - knowing this to be false - yet she gets a pass from those same Republicans. Not only that, but senators McCain and Graham echoed her exact words on the Senate floor. And you're crucifying Susan Rice for talking points that she did not know at the time were not indicative of the true conditions in Benghazi? Have you Republicans no shame at all?

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998 “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002 “I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 “Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998 “Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 “The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 “I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002 “Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 2002

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.