I always get antsy watching those doing the questioning because they inevitably give a full fledged speech in the process.
The answers were the important thing however. Or the lack of them. We don't have any more answers than we had before.
I learned a few things though. One is that Hillary, for one taking full responsibility, was remarkably disengaged. Two, that bad decision making and management are not grounds for dismissal at the State Department.
Now I realize State is a huge bureaucracy and being on top of everything isn't an easy task. It also makes me wonder if Mrs. Clinton had stayed more at her desk than in her plane she'd not have worked herself into a state of exhaustion and would have had a better handle on what was going on. Especially around the anniversary of 9/11.
There was so much contradiction of information that had come out before it makes me wonder if anyone to this day has a clue as to what happened. We know they don't know for sure who is responsible and that no one has been held accountable. That she was disengaged from much of the following investigations surprises me considering it was her ambassador, as in a State employee, that was murdered among others. I would have demanded to be kept in the loop.
I'm not going to go into the testimony line by line with the purpose of discrediting Hillary. She has done a pretty good job of that herself and she will soon be out of office.
What matters, though, other than an explanation that is feasible for the families of the dead, is how dysfunctional the department seems to be and what that means for our country as a new Secretary takes over.
We know the President has no interest in foreign policy. We don't have one. We know our allies are beginning to understand we will not have their back. So do our enemies. Without the threat of a strong America willing to keep a lid on things, I expect they will act with impunity. I expect there will be little other than war spreading across northern Africa while continuing in the middle east.
Those directly affected will do the best they can with what support they can muster from elsewhere. I expect at sometime the terrorists within our own country will stage another attack. Will those who've been left to fight their own battles offer any aid? Will they have totally exhausted any asset they might otherwise offer? Or will they say "Where were you when we needed you?"
I keep emphasizing the dangers of not engaging with the rest of the world. I don't mean pacifying. I don't mean boots on the ground either. There is a difference and there are other ways.
I have my doubts about how successful the President's domestic agenda is going to be. People are already uncomfortable with the tax burdens that are beginning to take hold. His view on foreign issues is out of sight out of mind. Will they be out of mind for the rest of the country?
Should the world suddenly turn peaceful and we see the end of all war I'll be shouting his praises to the sky. I don't think I need to save my voice.
Four years from now, we're looking at the top two Democrat presidential pretenders to be a questionably successful former Secretary of State and a Vice President who couldn't define diplomacy if his life depended on it.
This is a situation to be taken one day at a time. Looking at the big picture is too overwhelming.