January 31, 2013
What difference does it make whether the U.S. Ambassador to Libya was murdered by Al Qaeda operatives or just some bad boys looking for a thrill? What difference, indeed?
Maybe it was because Hillary Clinton’s remark came perilously close to suggesting indifference to the terrorist killing of four Americans, that her coterie of media protectors so effusively praised her appalling performance in last week’s congressional inquiry. Maybe it was for the same reason that MSNBC host Chris Matthews felt such an obviously urgent need to trash-talk Senator Ron Johnson for asking the question lots of people would still like to hear answered.
But whatever their immediate motivation, the performance of the leftist media had the unmistakable look of a fire brigade in full panic mode.
Much conservative commentary too easily concedes the Secretary of Prevarication got away with shifting blame to underlings, and even playing down the idea that there was anyone to be blamed at all. But the media reaction clearly betrayed an understanding that something seriously bad was happening to the deceitful people and the false narrative they labor every day to sustain.
To borrow Clinton’s formulation, the difference it makes at this point is that, watching her theatrical wriggling to escape giving a straight answer, most neutral observers would recognize telltale signs that the highest officials of the Obama administration were angered by the Benghazi murders primarily because they contradicted a carefully crafted political lie, and only secondarily because they constituted an unprovoked act of war against Americans.
Stated more simply, unless the administration’s own convenience is impaired, they don’t give a damn, and now a lot more people know it.
That’s the difference it makes.