Wednesday, June 20, 2012

The Sieve

So far, June has been such a horrible month for Obama & Co. that it’s hard to figure out where to start commenting on it.

Do you start by talking about the trouncing they took in traditionally blue Wisconsin, where voters rebuked their efforts to recall Scott Walker?

Or by talking about the fact that public sector unions, which comprised the main interest group in that recall effort, were also rebuked in California of all places?

Or do you start by talking about The Exalted One’s blatantly false and breathtakingly foolish remark that the public sector is struggling and the private sector doing “fine” -- when the private sector’s unemployment rate is almost twice that of the public sector’s?

Or by talking about the recently released unemployment figures, which a) were worse than Obama & Co. projected and b) confirmed that America has been stuck at more than eight percent unemployment for forty consecutive months -- ever since Barack Obama’s first full month in office?

Or do you start by talking about Attorney General Eric Holder’s obstruction of Congressional efforts to investigate the Fast and Furious scandal, which has led to the deaths of many Mexicans and one U.S. Border Patrol agent?

Or by talking about how after sixteen months of Holder’s stonewalling, Obama suddenly invoked executive privilege to protect him, on the same day that a vote was scheduled about whether to move forward on charging him with contempt of Congress?

Those are all good places to start and they all demonstrate why Obama does not deserve a second term. But as far as I am concerned, the month’s biggest story is the one about how his White House is leaking national security secrets to the press and jeopardizing our safety in the process.

The primary responsibility of our federal government is to defend America, and by extension our allies, against enemies who would not hesitate to kill us or rob us of our freedom. And because Obama is perceived to lack determination and courage in this arena, it is imperative for him to gain “street cred” as he seeks reelection. When it comes to the recent New York Times articles that divulged secret details about our national defense tactics, it is impossible for me not to conclude that those details were intentionally leaked to the Times by Obama’s inner circle, so that they would be broadcast to the world and make him appear strong and smart. And I would bet a thousand dollars to a donut that the leaking was done with Obama’s knowledge, perhaps even at his behest.

There is no doubt that leaks are coming from the White House, since the Times descries a source as "a senior administration official" and the Tampa Tribune reveals that "some of the information was known by only a handful of administration people." And it must be difficult for anyone to doubt that leaks are being done for any reason other than to lather the president in leg-tingling praise. Historically, most leaks are of the whistleblower variety, done to help the leaker clear his conscience over actions that offend him on an ethical plane; but the recent Obama leaks resulted in him being referred to as "a student of the writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas" who "believes that he should take moral responsibility for such actions" -- a line that should cause tear-inducing laughter, since Obama has a very long history of opposing warfare and never came close to mentioning Augustine or Aquinas in either of the books he wrote about himself.

But setting sardonic humor aside, the main issue regarding the leaks is that they make us less likely to receive help from our allies, and therefore less likely to prevent attacks in the future. It's a given that no one will cooperate in espionage if they can't trust that their methods and sources will be protected. If we won't protect our own secrets, how can anyone trust us to protect theirs?

Horrific real world effects have already happened in the leaks' wake. Shakil Afridi is a Pakistani physician who risked his safety and life to help us locate Osama bin Laden. Without his bravery, bin Laden would still be alive. And now, after the leaks led to his involvement being disclosed in public, he has been taken hostage and thrown into prison and is almost definitely being tortured. And no one in the Obama administration, much less Obama himself, is lifting a finger to secure his release.

Most American citizens do not know about this shameful episode, but every country's government certainly does, and given that knowledge I can not image a scenario in which they would choose to stand by our side.

If the Afridi episode shows how we treat our friends, then we are sure to be friendless, and it is entirely, one hundred percent, the fault of Obama and his cronies.

Who can possibly think it is a good idea to return that bunch to the executive branch for another four years?

No comments: