And three cheers for Victoria Nuland: We’re very glad to see Kevin Drum adopt this posture regarding Victoria Nuland:
DRUM: (5/24/13): Rice, of course, has already been attacked by Republicans about as viciously and shamelessly as any State Department lieutenant in recent memory. But it's worth keeping in mind that there is a difference between the two women. In the Benghazi affair, Rice did nothing wrong, but she also did nothing especially noteworthy. Nuland, as near as I can tell, actually did yeoman work. The first draft of the CIA talking points was sloppily drafted and full of information that needed to be kept classified. Nuland firmly pushed back on this stuff, and eventually got it removed—which is exactly what she should have done.We agree. As we read through the e-mails, we see Nuland making smart, sensible objections to an array of dumb stupid shit that came from the CIA.
It’s good that Nuland raised those objections. Just as Drum says, it’s what she should have done.
That’s why it’s so disgusting to watch a multimillionaire corporate clown like Rachel Maddow talk politics. In the May 15 segment we just critiqued, she ended up speaking with Michael Isikoff—and the well-twinned waste meats rolled their eyes at “bureaucrats” like Nuland.
Maddow and Isikoff discussed the process by which the talking points were edited. Instantly, Isikoff introduced the idea that people like Nuland had wasted their time producing “complete bureaucratic mush.”
Maddow, who is thoroughly clueless, quickly adopted Isikoff’s lead, saying of the e-mail exchanges, “It sounds like bureaucratic nonsense.”
That’s the way they talk on Fox. Maddow is too dumb and too self-involved to know that.
Maddow’s a highly skilled peddler of self. We liberals are massive marks.
(For our previous report on this topic, just click here.)