Give credit to Fox News on Benghazi-gate
For those of a steadfast opposition to Fox News, this opinion won't change anything.
That's too bad. But then again, there will always be such "experts" among us – particularly those who have no idea how to separate fact from fiction.
Whether you prefer the more independent (conservative, if you will) Fox News or the myriad other mainstream media outlets who primarily dance to the beat of the same drummer, the fact remains: Fox News was – and is – ahead of the curve on Benghazi-gate.
(For the record, Fox News cannot count me among its viewers. Nor can any other network. I prefer reading to listening to any talking head who gets paid to look good and read a teleprompter at the same time.)
While ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC et. al., were all too content to propagate the Obama administration myth that some underground ant-Islam video – that less than a handful of people have ever seen – was a direct cause for the Sept. 11-12 assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Fox News told a different and much more accurate story. (And to give the left-leaning CNN its due, the network did concede that the administration's behavior is indicative of a cover-up.) Ya think?
The early absence of any real reporting by the mainstream media on the deaths of four Americans suggests either a measure of incompetence or a degree of partisan collusion. (Given the mainstream media's track record of the past 20 years, the correct answer is probably a little bit of both.)
The early Benghazi reporting – or lack thereof – was to accept on face value the administration's insistence that some bargain basement anti-Mohammed video clip caused "a protest" to turn deadly. Baloney.
These terrorists were well-armed with rocket-propelled grenades. They weren't using slingshots and launching water balloons like a passel of college protesters out on the town. This was serious stuff. Deadly serious, in fact.
Had the Bush administration offered such a lame excuse for an obvious terrorists' attack against the United States, the network television news would be demanding honest answers on a nightly basis.
During his debate with Mitt Romney, Obama claimed to have recognized that the Sept. 11 assault may have been related to terrorism. No, he didn't. He briefly referenced terrorism in general terms, but he continued to allow press secretary Jay Carney and ambassador Susan Rice to offer the weak and inaccurate excuse that this was a protest of the video and not a coordinated terrorist attack. Their collective denial was shameful, if not criminal.
In fact, Obama even permitted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to assume ownership of the Benghazi debacle. The last time anyone checked, Hillary Rodham isn't the president (much to the Whitewater Lady's chagrin).
Whatever happened to presidents like Harry Truman who made the difficult decisions and accepted the responsibility thereof? (The buck stops here.)
With each new report on the now months-old attack in Benghazi, it's becoming clearer and clearer that Obama's re-election was of a much higher priority than telling the American people the truth about Benghazi.
One of the primary lessons of Watergate (back when The Washington Post really did publish investigative news) was that the cover-up is usually more troublesome than the original offense.
[[In-content Ad]]
With his second term now secure, it's time for Obama to come clean on Benghazi.
If, in the unlikely scenario that the president wasn't briefed on the deadly assault, he needs to explain why, and tell us what consequences await those who failed him (and our servicemen).
When something as serious as an attack on an American ambassador and U.S. servicemen fails to warrant any military support, the buck must stop with the commander in chief. Not the secretary of state, not an ambassador, not the CIA director, and not the Pentagon.
To borrow a phrase from the president: This is not beyond your pay grade.
No, this is your administrative failure. Own it. Tell us how it happened and tell us what you are doing to ensure it won't happen again.
As the media often asked of Nixon: What did the president know and when did he know it?
Rory Ryan is publisher of The Highland County Press.