Ambassador Rice for Secretary of State?

Ambassador Rice is being talked about as a possible replacement for Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.  There are a lot of unanswered questions regarding Benghazi - mostly who knew what, when, and in regard to what happened, what are the timeframes that apply.  Perhaps just as important, for what reasons (like for reasons of political gain) were these actions taken?

While much is unclear, the following seems clear:

     American officials asked for additional security forces, and were not only denied, but existing security forces were withdrawn.

     Calls for help on Sept 11 were not answered - we didn't even attempt to get military aid to Benghazi.

     Whether Pres. Obama said that the Benghazi disaster was an act of terror or not when he gave his press conference on Sep 12 - Ambassador Rice did say on five different news networks five days later that the attacks were related to the movie trailer and not to a terrorist attack.

This we know to be untrue - the Benghzai attack was a terrorist attack.  Since the President is now saying that he called the attack on Benghazi a terrorist attack on Sep 12, the network interviews given by Ambassador Rice five days later were either incompetence of the highest order, or outright lies for political gain.

This incompetence or duplicity of Ambassador Rice's interviews alone should make her possible selection as Secretary of State a non starter.

As the administration likes to say, elections have consequences.  Well, so do actions.