Susan Rice's miserable record at the UN


Susan Rice’s miserable record at the UN
By Richard Grenell
Published November 15, 2012

Most reporters haven’t been following Ambassador Susan Rice’s performance at the United Nations since her appointment in January 2009. To many journalists, Rice’s misleading interviews on the five Sunday Shows the weekend after the 9/11/12 terrorist attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others were one of the first times they had heard from her. To veteran foreign policy observers, Rice’s shameful performance that Sunday was one of many blunders over the last four years.

Rice has been consistently silent on other important issues and ineffective when she does engage. She skipped Security Council meetings when Israel needed defending and even failed to show up for the emergency session on the Gaza Flotilla incident.

Rice didn’t even show up for the first two emergency Security Council meetings on the unfolding Arab Spring revolution last year. Rice stayed silent when Iran was elected to the U.N. women’s committee, she didn’t call out Libya when it was elected to the Human Rights Council, she was absent from the Haiti crisis meeting and was a no-show for the last open meeting scheduled before the planned UN vote to recognize Palestinian statehood. When she actually does show up, she is a miserable failure.

Take the crucial issue of Iran. Rice spent the last several years undermining and grumbling about the Bush administration’s increasingly tough measures but has only been able to pass one resolution of her own – compared with the Bush team’s five.

Rice’s one and only Iran resolution was almost 30 months ago. And it passed with just 12 votes of support – the least support we have ever seen for a Security Council sanctions resolution on Iran.

I realize scrutinizing Amb. Rice’s record and “accomplishments” has been declared to be racist - is this an adjective in the OED race-baiters aren’t prepared to call "Racist? - but this article does some serious slicing, dicing and julienning.


Having 'puter probs, Pete, so the link won’t come up. Hope you don’t mind my going just on what’s here.

I’m glad this came up because I’ve been wondering why we hadn’t heard of Amb. Susan Rice before now. We certainly heard of Amb. John Bolton! (Whom I highly admire, btw.) Anyway, I’m beginning to see why. She’s completely incompetant. (A common character flaw throughout the entire admin.)

Also, she struck as incredibly young for such an auspicious position.
And now I’m going to be called ‘racist’ because I thought that might be due to her being black, (even though I happen to think that that common characteristic is a god-send), and perhaps Amb. Rice is older than she appears.

Wish I could read the article. It’s something I’ve been very curious about.



Links works for me…

Rice is like almost every single appointee by bammy just ANOTHER shill/sycophant incompetent loser who only accomplishment is sucking bammy butt. But then he choses people in his own image…losers


[quote=“17Oaks, post:4, topic:37249”]
just ANOTHER shill/sycophant incompetent loser who only accomplishment is sucking bammy butt. But then he choses people in his own image…losers


I noticed BHO was particularly defensive about “attacks” (which are simply reasonable debates) on Rice, in a recent interview he had. The feigned anger was apparent to me, and was a dead giveaway to me that he wanted to disrupt the discussion. Much like he did in the second debate, when he “angrily” responded to claims that Benghazi was politically motivated. The guy has that tactic mastered.

My guess on this: He was signaling the MSM that discussing Rice was not something they should cover, and either he or the MSM came up with the classic “race” argument, thereby reducing all discussion of Rice to the “race” excuse.

Whether he was signaling, or the MSM itself decided this, is speculation on my part, but whoever came up with it (the Dem party?), it’s WORKING and always has.

It’s a tool Dems always use, successfully I might add, to divert reasonable discussions on competence.

My sense also is that BHO, in the much larger picture, was stifling ANY discussion of competence about ANY ONE in his administration. Clearly, the MSM has taken that message and run with it.

Valid discussions on this are relegated to the “Its only the lunatic fringe racist group making these statements” bin. Reinforced, of course, by the Fox News discussion. It’s their way of portraying Fox News as the “lunatic fringe”. Granted, Fox News does indeed go off the deep end now and then, but the Dems can paint it with that broad “racist” brush, and thereby cast doubt on ALL Fox News pieces, including the ones that have some credible substance.

The Republicans are going to have to figure out how to address this “race” excuse, otherwise all valid discussions about the competence of the BHO administration are going to be trivialized and soon forgotten.

The Dems steal another march on the Republicans here.


What would constitute a good record at the UN?


I was, and will say, nothing incompetant about the treacherous syncophants of the Obama empire. He knows and his gang knows exactly what they are doing. Mss Rice is playing the game of misdirection and disinformation to a tee. This IS the Obama tactic.


I can’t say, specifically, but telling them to stick it where the sun don’t shine when they come after our 2nd Amendment rights is a good start. However, I’d agree that telling them where to go once and for all would be better.

Well, the 'puter seems to be back to normal 'cuz the article came up, and, as usual, it’s Bush’s fault.

ObamaNOT is right, as we all know. They’ve surrounded the Incompetant in Chief with ‘people of color’ so that every time someone questions their screw-up, they can pull the race card. And yeah, that feigned, “I’m so insulted”, has grown mighty old, too. Still, it works for MSM, so it works for them!

We had an opportunity to fix at least a little bit of stupid. Obviously, not enough people wanted to or could agree on how to.


Reminding them that we pay the lion’s share of the money that they spend trying to undercut our sovereignty and if they succeed the money tree they’ve grown used to is gone. Oh and cleaning out any offices we have there and placing the property the building sits on up for sale.


What would constitute a good record at the UN?

The details depend on the times, but being hated for being effective would be a good sign - e.g. Jeane Kilpatrick or Alan Keyes, who served as Ambassador to the United Nations Economic and Social Council.