“Cunning leads to knavery. It is but a step from one to the other, and that very slippery. Only lying makes the difference; add that to cunning, and it is knavery.” – Ovid
Welcome to another game of “the truth means nothing, unless it gets me something!” This is a favored game of the Democrats, one that they have even mastered. No one can match the skill of Barack Obama in this arena. But a new challenger has emerged from the rubbish bin of the 2008 Democratic primary. Her name is Hillary Clinton. After being beaten for the top spot way back in 2008, Clinton has played on Barack Obama’s team as an underling, of sorts. She has fought her way back to the forefront of the Party, however, and now she’s gunning for the top spot.
The goal of the game is to pick a scandal—any scandal (I know there are just so many to choose from)–and first deny any responsibility. Then, once enough time has passed, suddenly accept some amorphous form of culpability, thus making you look like a responsible leader. As I mentioned previously, prior to this new challenger, Barack Obama was the undefeated champion of this sport. His denial of culpability regarding the failure of Obamacare, followed by his heartfelt non-apology about keeping our doctors, was masterful. But Hillary Clinton may have just taken the cake, and eaten it, with her latest ploy.
Remember when the administration, led by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, claimed no involvement or responsibility for the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012? Remember when they blamed it on a YouTube video? Then remember when Hillary testified to Congress regarding possible fault, and she said:
“The fact is we had four dead Americans, was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?”
Now, as the 2016 presidential race looms large in Hillary Clinton’s future, her tune is changing. In a recent interview at Simmons College, Clinton said that her biggest regret was Benghazi:
“It would certainly be the attack on our facility in Benghazi, and the loss of, uh, two State Department personnel and two CIA contractors from the terrorist attack and the terrible consequences of that…It’s very, very painful and it was certainly the biggest regret that I had as Secretary of State.”
So, if the administration was not at fault for anything that happened regarding Benghazi, why is she regretful? Why is it her biggest regret as Secretary of State? It all seems a bit odd, doesn’t it?
Forget Obama, Hillary has become the master sportsman. She denied any responsibility for the Benghazi tragedy, but now that the election is coming, she has accepted a vague culpability. This will make her look like a seasoned leader, as well as help her deflect any criticism she may face in the coming months regarding Benghazi. Point to Hillary. A brilliant tactician is what every sport needs.