Published on -2/15/2013, 12:27 PM
Here comes Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.
I have two important points to make in this letter. I ask readers to diligently note my detail and patiently read what I have to say.
The Benghazi hearings recently in the U.S. Senate and House clearly shows there is no accountability if one belongs to a particular party where media today doesn't even hide its partisanship. By now, informed readers should know that four great Americans died serving their country in the Middle East some five months ago; a huge scandal ignored by mainstream media.
During the hearings, for every pointed question to get to the bottom of exactly what happened in Benghazi, there were fifty comments lauding Clinton's service to her country as secretary of state. You would think she is the best this country has ever had, even though there have never been so many problems internationally in our history.
Did the hearings get to the bottom of the issues involved? Nope. We still don't know who instigated the notion the Benghazi attack in Libya was the result of a meaningless YouTube video rather than a terrorist attack.
It's pretty clear the video was used as an excuse because Obama, who supposedly ordered Osama bin Laden's demise (and that is debatable), was determined to give voters prior to the November election the impression al-Qaeda was on the run. In other words, the decision to blame a video was a political one absent any facts or reality. It was clear from the get go it was al-Qaeda.
Clinton testified her State Department never received requests from Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi to shore up security. That can't possibly be true, considering the many communications from one to the other. Even without those requests, it was obvious Libya was a hotspot for an attack. One could easily conclude incompetence by Clinton on both accounts.
Trust me, readers, when I say (better still, do your own research) there's tons more in this scandal that doesn't pass the smell test. or example, where was Obama the day of the attack? Where was Clinton? Both AWOL. Both lied about the video.
Point No. 1: Hillary was not a great secretary of state; just average at best.
Point No. 2: Clinton said she takes responsibility for what happened in Benghazi. What does that mean? The answer is that mainstream media will give her a pass on lies, incompetence, and a cover up, because Hillary's their man (woman) for president in 2016 if she wants it.
Can you imagine the media uproar if the Benghazi scandal had occurred under Bush? That thought alone proves unequivocally there is media bias.
There's a good chance the public will not choose our next president. The state-run Obama mainstream media will by communicating, especially to low-information voters getting free stuff, that a Democrat can do no wrong and a Republican can do nothing right.
Media became enthralled by the first black president. They will do the same with the first woman president. Obama's past meant nothing to media, nor will Hillary's.
Media has no shame. Journalistic ethics of reporting the facts or the truth is a thing of the past. This phenomenon of media bias is becoming more and more offensive by the day.
The proof of media bias is that a mediocre secretary of state will be put in the White House if she decides to run. Whether Hillary (or some other Democrat), media will be all about promoting liberalism and bashing conservatism.
I rest my case.
Victoria and Gilbert, Ariz.