Why I am bored by Benghazi
May 12, 2013 3 Comments
Notice that when Benghazi is not about whether anything will or can rise to the level of ‘impeachable’ (which is moot), it’s all about Hillary Clinton’s prospects for winning the Presidency in 2016. It’s either circle-the-wagons-around-our-leader-mascot (so as not to suffer a vicarious political setback which would make lefties feel bad), or a meta-discussion over what qualities are required of a President.
And what qualities are those, you ask? Answer: being a (D) and being able to win the Presidency. The left believes Hillary Clinton might qualify in this sense, i.e. might be able to win an election in 2016, and therefore they simply can’t tolerate any talk that anything about Benghazi might make her not be President let alone not be ‘qualified’ to be President.
Because what is ‘qualified’ anyway, in our age of Smart People credentialism? To Smart People, being ‘qualified’ is an objective matter that consists of getting the right items onto your resume, and/or having the right identity (e.g. Obama was qualified to be President because he was kinda black but not too black). And…that’s it. What you actually do or not-do or accomplish or say or decide or achieve doesn’t matter. At least, Smart People don’t want it to matter.
Why would they? If being qualified is simply a matter of getting the right degrees, credentials, and titles on a corporate- or government-ladder, then Smart People know how to navigate that. Their parents set them up nicely to be successful in such a world. But the idea that qualification has something to do with the actual decisions you make once there scares Smart People to death. In the end, this is why the Smart People left is so obstinate and ‘bored’ and denialist on the issue of Benghazi: they can’t afford, psychologically, to truly confront anything about it or discuss it seriously, because it has to do with actual tangible decisions, and weighing right and wrong. Smart People want nothing to do with a world in which those things matter, and so can’t allow criticism of Hillary Clinton on anything like those grounds to take root.
Politics in such an environment is broken, of course. Errors in governance cannot be sanely discussed let alone criticized, analyzed, and corrected. Nobody cares about such errors. They care about careers, and in the case of leaders, the vicarious importance of those careers to what they themselves can accomplish. It is a pure status game; nothing will be improved, nothing will be truly achieved, mistakes will not be corrected. That’s why when the left continually says that Benghazi is a big fat nothing and that they are ‘bored’ by it, I have to admit, I am too.