The American media have been disgracefully ignoring the murder of U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in Benghazi almost one year ago with some of them having the nerve to echo President Obama's claim that it's a "phony scandal."
Not Camille Paglia who in an interview with Salon Wednesday said, "I for one think it was a very big deal that our ambassador was murdered in Benghazi...As far as I’m concerned, Hillary [Clinton] disqualified herself for the presidency in that fist-pounding moment at a congressional hearing when she said, 'What difference does it make what we knew and when we knew it, Senator?'”
Not surprisingly, Paglia was asked about her views on the 2016 elections:
As a registered Democrat, I am praying for a credible presidential candidate to emerge from the younger tier of politicians in their late 40s. A governor with executive experience would be ideal. It’s time to put my baby-boom generation out to pasture! We’ve had our day and managed to muck up a hell of a lot. It remains baffling how anyone would think that Hillary Clinton (born the same year as me) is our party’s best chance. She has more sooty baggage than a 90-car freight train. And what exactly has she ever accomplished — beyond bullishly covering for her philandering husband? She’s certainly busy, busy and ever on the move — with the tunnel-vision workaholism of someone trying to blot out uncomfortable private thoughts.
I for one think it was a very big deal that our ambassador was murdered in Benghazi. In saying “I take responsibility” for it as secretary of state, Hillary should have resigned immediately. The weak response by the Obama administration to that tragedy has given a huge opening to Republicans in the next presidential election. The impression has been amply given that Benghazi was treated as a public relations matter to massage rather than as the major and outrageous attack on the U.S. that it was.
Throughout history, ambassadors have always been symbolic incarnations of the sovereignty of their nations and the dignity of their leaders. It’s even a key motif in “King Lear.” As far as I’m concerned, Hillary disqualified herself for the presidency in that fist-pounding moment at a congressional hearing when she said, “What difference does it make what we knew and when we knew it, Senator?” Democrats have got to shake off the Clinton albatross and find new blood. The escalating instability not just in Egypt but throughout the Mideast is very ominous. There is a clash of cultures brewing in the world that may take a century or more to resolve — and there is no guarantee that the secular West will win.
In fairness, Paglia has never been a fan of Hillary's.
In January 2008, Paglia came out strongly against Clinton's candidacy as Democratic presidential nominee.
April of that year she wrote "Why Women Shouldn't Vote for Hillary Clinton."
The following month she wrote "Hillary Clinton's Candidacy Has Done Feminism No Favors."
But don't hold any of that against her.
That said, wouldn't it be nice if other members of the liberal media would honestly assess Clinton's role and subsequent behavior surrending what happened in Benghazi as well as doing a dispassionate analysis of her successes and failures as Secretary of State?
Or is that just too much like good journalism?