Tue Nov 27, 2012, 05:33 PM
Tx4obama (36,562 posts)
Jon Huntsman (R): Benghazi, Susan Rice Criticism Overblown
Jon Huntsman: Benghazi, Susan Rice Criticism Overblown
WASHINGTON -- Former Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman on Monday urged lawmakers, including those in his own party, to temper their criticism of the administration's handling of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Huntsman, who served as U.S. ambassador to China under President Barack Obama, said that it would have been nearly impossible for authorities to instantly obtain accurate intelligence about who was responsible for the September attack, which resulted in the death of four officials. Because of that, he said, recent criticism of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice for not immediately declaring the attack an act of terror was either politically motivated or misplaced.
"The issue of Benghazi, I think you can attribute to the fog of war, more than anything else," Huntsman said in an interview with The Huffington Post. "When you're in a wartime setting and you have an attack like that -- let's face it. No one is prepared for an attack like that. There is, as Robert McNamara used to say, there is a fog of war. And it takes awhile to sort through the details. And it doesn't do a whole lot of good for the political class to point fingers before you even know what was behind it. And you're not going to know that ."
In offering up his assessment, Huntsman became the rare Republican to downplay the boiling controversy surrounding the matter. Rice went to Capitol Hill Tuesday to discuss her post-attack talking points with aggrieved Republican lawmakers. Early reaction suggested that she ran into a proverbial buzzsaw.
Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/jon-huntsman-benghazi-susan-rice_n_2198698.html
15 replies, 2607 views
Jon Huntsman (R): Benghazi, Susan Rice Criticism Overblown (Original post)
|toby jo||Nov 2012||#6|
|Filibuster Harry||Nov 2012||#13|
|Tuesday Afternoon||Nov 2012||#15|
Response to elleng (Reply #3)
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:40 PM
madinmaryland (55,927 posts)
8. I don't see Christie succeeding in 2016. To run in the primaries based on running
a "successful" government backed recovery in New Jersey will be the death of his candidacy. I'm sure that Obama will assist in that happening, also!
Response to elleng (Reply #9)
Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:40 PM
hifiguy (13,143 posts)
12. Probably not for another couple of election cycles
maybe more. The plutocrats have the money but the religulously insane/racist/bagger contingent has the numbers. Right now I'd make a small wager on Frothy or someone very much like him for 2016.
Huntsman would have been formidable. The WH was supposedly quite concerned about him. He's a sane, reasonable, rational adult, a believer in science, who was a successful governor and had meaningful international diplomatic experience. Which meant he never had a snowball's chance in hell with the Repig primary electorate.
Response to davidpdx (Reply #4)
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:25 PM
neffernin (230 posts)
5. American politics
would be much better of the republican party was more like Huntsman, every time I've seen him hit the national stage he seems fairly grounded.
I don't mind if you think that trickle-down economics works, but I like hard proof and/or REAL statistical evidence to state your claim and hate claims made on faith or obviously biased/fake evidence.
Imagine it, a debate on the actual issues and instead of finger-pointing, people offer solutions! Hello college-level politics and goodbye middle-school politics!
Response to neffernin (Reply #5)
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:34 PM
toby jo (874 posts)
6. He's more of the old school republican
when there were actual debates that moved the country forward.
It'll be interesting to see with all of this collective changing of the right wing mind if maybe he'll last a little further into the election season next time around.
My money's on 'No'. Don't think they'll gravitate that far.
Response to toby jo (Reply #6)
Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:49 PM
neffernin (230 posts)
7. Its all about the image
I mean, move to the right yet lets get Hispanics and women into the fold! I highly doubt any realistic change beyond possibly a new-age of trickery will come any time soon. 2000 was stolen in the courts, 2004 was stolen by tons of lies (people still listened to advertising), in 2008 they tried Sarah Palin for the female vote and in 2012 they tried a massive outpouring of ads and spending.
Hopefully we are in a new america where those involved in politics care about the country and not just themselves and their friends. If that is the case, sooner or later the R's will dissapear.
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:45 PM
Filibuster Harry (633 posts)
13. The Rs blew it by not making him the nominee. A former Governor who if you look at his
record is/was a true conservative. But he was singled out because he worked for President Obama.
Really. Mitt, if elected, was going to work with the Democrats but yet he chastised Jon Huntsman for working with a democratic president. So Mitt, in case the president asks you about a job position, make sure you turn him down.