« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Sen. Ron Johnson the Winner of the Week in Washington

By: briansikma (Diary)  |  January 28th, 2013 at 11:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Sometimes a citizen lawmaker dares to exercise such candor that the inside-the-Beltway crowd recoils in horror at the blatant honesty. Such was the case with Wisconsin’s own Senator Ron Johnson (R) this past week. Johnson captured attention with his tough questioning of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to finally answer questions about the Benghazi disaster of last September.

Clinton, demonstrating the cunning political acumen that propelled her and her husband so far on the national political stage, weaved a range of emotions into her carefully prepared opening statement. With her final months as Secretary of State clouded by the death of an American ambassador and a subsequent lack of honesty in dealing with the situation during a political campaign, Clinton had to present a strong showing to maintain future political opportunities.

Then Ron Johnson happened.

Refusing to accept Clinton’s scripted answers, Johnson pressed the Secretary for specific details of her involvement in the disaster and her Department’s failure to protect one of its own. The exchange was contentious and tumultuous.

After the hearing, Johnson suggested to a reporter that Clinton was less than genuine in her appearance before the committee. What he suggested wasn’t flattering, but it was true. As any candid political observer knows, the Clintons are masterful politicians who are able to fabricate and project an image that may not be genuine but is quite convincing.

For daring to question Hillary Clinton’s motives, Senator Johnson was named the person who had the “Worst Week in Washington” by the Washington Post‘s Chris Cillizza. Cillizza is a smart reporter, even if infected by the more liberal-leaning Potomac fever that taints a number in the nation’s political press corps elite, and his observations are often useful and insightful. But he’s dead wrong on this one.

Ron Johnson may have felt the pressure to back off his statement and the Washington intelligentsia may have found his honesty woefully out of line. But what he said didn’t only need to be said, it was true.

For far too long an incestuous atmosphere has pervaded the nation’s capitol. Establishment political figures in both parties have been given a pass by those who are supposed to be the watchdogs of the process. Instead of receiving the skepticism and vetting bestowed on others, these individuals – and the Clintons are among them – have been able to act with impunity expecting to never be held accountable.

Senator Johnson’s questions at the hearing, and subsequent candor about the attitude of Secretary Clinton, are a refreshing breath of fresh air.

Washington’s self-confidence does not comport well with a nation that sees looming fiscal and economic challenges growing closer by the day. To fix the problems we face it is going to take more honest leadership than Washington is used to being comfortable with. Senator Ron Johnson is one of those leaders who is willing to ignore the status quo that got us to where we are, and provide the honesty we need.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • libertynugget

    To quote “the Hillary:”

    “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

    By the time 2016 rolls around, no one will remember this. The Clinton machine will spin it into a “Republican Witch Hunt” and she won’t be affected. The media will ally themselves with her because she has only been seconded by Obama with their affection. Rachel Maddow will have the ‘tingling sensation’ running up her leg when she is nominated in 2016…

    Of course, it will be hard for her to run the “2am phone call” commercial with such a catastrophic failure.

    My cynicism is getting out of control!

    • albertmaslar

      “What difference does it make now?” Big difference; It was under Hillary’s watch that she and her department ignored multiple requests to the State Department for protection from continuing threats and actual violence but her department did not respond until all the water was over the dam.
      And then Hillary had her deputy on five Sunday TV shows lying that it was not terror or pre-planned but a spontaneous riot incited by a TV trailer that no one knew of or had seen. Administration officials lied for weeks and still do not really admit to the obvious truth as proven by TV monitoring in real time. Meanwhile Hillary answered questions with assumption of responsibility that in fact attaches no consequences.

      • libertynugget

        I’m not saying I agree with the slag, I’m just saying in 3 years it won’t matter in the media’s eyes and in turn in the voters eyes…

        It hasn’t even so much as tarnished Obama yet.

        • Rick_Caird

          I disagree. I can envision the ads now and they will be run during the primary as, if necessary, the general election.

          • libertynugget

            If we lived in a world where performance and records matter, then you’d definitely be correct. However, we live in a republic where celebrity status and name affiliation are the big winners. I bet more people can name the American Idol judges than can name the Senators who represent their state, much less 3 Supreme Court Justices.

            I pray that voters will actually pay attention in 2014/2016 and actually learn about the candidates, but 2012 didn’t offer me a lot of hope. Jimmy Carter would probably win re-election with our current electorate. Hence my cynicism.

  • Tbone

    By 2015, Hillary will be having to wear pancake makeup put on with a gunnite gun to look less that 90 years old. Biden will just be senile and drooling by then. It’s those Hispanic boys from San Antonio and the limo-liberal running New York we better be worrying about.

    • kipling

      The Castro boys are as low as it gets. I remember when they first came on the scene. There is a lot of truth in your warning. I hope someone is paying attention.

    • earlgrey

      As a woman, I should be more sensitive to insults of other women’s looks, but I am not. There are times when Hillary looks downright ghastly in appearance and others where she looks lovely.

      Quite offended to get numerous facebook postings about congratulating her on being a great Sec. of State. No criteria was given, but gee, I’d like to have those idiots do my performance review.

  • kipling

    Her response to Ron Johnson was the moment she lost the nomination in 2016. She reacted badly to the questioning. Image her voice saying “What difference, at this point, does it make?” as images of those killed in Begnhazi and their flag draped coffins appear on screen. Hillary will also have to deal with questions about her health and mental fitness for office – after all she has had head trauma and came a little unhinged during questioning. The glasses she used pointed to a touch of vertigo – also a head related injury. The Republicans might not do it but Cuomo will. He feels just as much entitlement as Hillary – and he wants revenge.

    • rennyangel4

      The video should be saved and shown be cons. and Reps. repeatedly running up to 2016 when ANY question arises.

    • Rick_Caird

      I think was planned and practiced “indignation”, but somehow, Hillary blew itwhen under the lights. This was theater that did not come off very well.

  • Ausonius

    Ron Johnson was the winner in that exchange?

    With highest dudgeon HR Clinton bonked him on the casaba from what I saw.

    If he indeed won that exchange, where exactly is the investigation of the debacle now?!

  • skorrent1

    Over four months later and we are still trying to find out the “who and why” of Benghasi?? In less than 2 months after 9/11/01 W had identified “who and why” and was busy bombing the he!! out of them. I realize the election was a priority (sarc), but even that was 2 1/2 months ago. I hear that the only one so far arrested for involvement was recently released by Tunisia.
    As to the “video” excuse, her only response was that things were very confusing and they were trying to sort it out. If so, why were they so confident in claiming that it was the video at the time?

  • rockxie

    I thought she was just like Obama. She gets angry and lashes out when faced with the the truth.

  • gunnyg2002

    Obama and Hillary are the poster children for liberalism run amok. Both are spoiled children who scream when they hear the truth and lie like rugs when they can.

  • rennyangel4

    I’ve always called the Hill “Lady Macbeth,” who famously asked, “Who is to hold our power to account?”

  • coemgenus

    Poor Hillary could not be expected to have reported on what happened in Benghazi until she was absolutely sure of her facts – except she was sure that it was the video that sparked the non-existent protest that turned into a terrorist attack. Why did no one ask her where the intelligence about the video came from? Because we all know that it came from the fertile imagination she devolped battling Bimbo Eruptions.

  • duncer

    What is more striking is the more senior senators slipping and sliding to the same tune as the wicked witch.

  • daniel22

    It was a useless waste of time for this inquiry to have been made in the first place. This administration will never ever tell the truth about Benghazi and with a complicit Congress going along why would the truth come out? As far as partisan politics goes this was the time for the GOP to push for answers but instead they just posed for the cameras. Please note that one of those good old boys will soon be asking us for money and time to donate to their campaign. Ask yourself if they actually deserve it. Judging by these performances I say they did not and should be kicked out.

  • mogul264

    So someone calls a Democrat onto the carpet, and the liberal “comedia”, I mean, ‘main stream media’ doesn’t like it? Should be THEM doing it, I say! They have been hovering and slobbering at Zerobama’s feet for WAY TOO long! About time they went to work, doing what the press USED to do when they were really UNBIASED!

  • soljerblue

    I dunno. RJ was good, but I thought Rand Paul was equally so, especially when he said if he’d been president(hint, hint?) he’d have fired ol’ Hillary. Face it — RP drove that reprobate Boxer from the room. That’s harder to do than getting flies off, well…you know.