A brief against the Obama administration’s direction

LA JOLLA, California — I often ask myself how can a president with this record on economy and national security get reelected. The legitimate enthusiasm of good people witnessing a Black person become president of the US can provide an explanation for the first election in 2008. The second one should be judged on merit and performance, regardless of color, ethnicity, religion, gender,or economic status. As we have repeatedly shown with facts and numbers, the president’s performance has been dismal.  Even the Black population didn’t do better : their rate of unemployment increased to 14.8 % , much worse than the national average of 7.9 % . Nor did the Hispanics; nor the “Middle-Class.”

I wrote previously about the media (complacent, compliant, and complicit) ; and about the electorate ( ignorant, apathetic, or profiting from the largesse that the president dispenses –with Other People’s Money.)

But there are other factors involved, which are cultural in nature: We, as a collective, have lost the capacity for shock and shame , for responsibility and accountability. They  were replaced with cynicism, egocentrism, and the demand for instant gratification at the expense of others. What was supposed to be temporary relief to the needy until they regain their independence, has become an “entitlement,” untouchable and expanding ominously.And the leftist governments encourage that as a legitimate right. The Judeo-Christian biblical injunction to help the poor, the widow and the orphan was meant to provide food and shelter and protection from oppression, not a Hawaiian vacation, or a monetary gift that surpasses their income if they worked.

As a corollary, our society and government  punish success and reward failure. Just watch television to find confirmation of this observation. Otherwise, how can we explain what I called the “avalanche of scandals” in this administration not only going unnoticed but even rewarded, especially the Fast and Furious project and the Benghazi debacle in which precious American lives  were lost.                                                                                                                                                            In the Benghazi scandal, the government didn’t foresee the danger, ordered those brave men who wanted to come to the rescue  to”stand down” ,i.e. do nothing, didn’t rush help when requested, and then dissembled  and covered up for a long time with the stupid lie, (repeated by the US ambassador to the UN, the Secretary of State, and the president in a speech at the UN, no less) , that an obscure anti-Islamist movie caused the mob to riot,  before admitting that it was an act of terror. We learned later that the authorities were watching the events in real time and knew the truth from the beginning.

This shameful behavior would have toppled any other democratic government — Tony Blair lost the British Premiership because he “sexed-up” Saddam Hussein’s possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction–.and, without the media “protection through silence,” it would have been ground for the Secretary’ resignation and the President’s impeachment.

The “reward” for these debacles was twofold: First: the so-called “testimony” of the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton,that was first avoided, then delayed until more than four months after Benghazi, which was more of a “testimonial” to her “good” work. Not only did she not answer the difficult questions but she turned into the prosecutor, yelling with a faked anger ” What difference does it make…?” in a display of chutzpah that stunned her interrogators into silence. She knew that her explosive reaction would make the headlines the next day, and that would be her first salvo for the 2016 presidential elections.

Second: a few days later, we were treated to an astonishing softball interview of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton by Steve Croft of 60 Minutes. Even the sympathetic press characterized the interview as ” a dating game,” a “lovefest,” tender questions to “a married loving couple” who congratulated each other on a “job well done,”  and celebrated their successes, and were thankful for the accolades. What a travesty, courtesy of 60 Minutes which I used to respect and admire. Not one question about the failed state of the economy; not one question about the Benghazi disaster.Mike Wallace must be turning in his grave…of shock and shame, and lack of dignity and journalistic responsibility.

To crown all that, we heard V.P. Biden , like his boss many times before him, again “outstretch his hand and unclench his fists” and call on Iran to please agree to talk with the US government…and, as he did before, the Supreme Leader Khamenei blasted America with contempt and flatly rejected the American offer.

This was apparently not enough for the Obama government. There are rumors of more “appeasement” such as lifting the sanctions before the “talks” take place. I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens (and if it is again rejected.)

All this agitation makes me surmise that the Obama administration, despite its official policy to prevent the nuclearisation of Iran rather than its “containment” after fact, has now reversed its position without telling anyone, and “allowed” Hagel to enunciate that change in his confirmation hearings, in an apparent confusion. Let me remind the readers here that all the three cabinet appointees (John Kerry, State;  Chuck Hagel, Defense; John Brennan, CIA) have expressed their position favoring “containment.” I believe that Obama will “follow their advice” and switch. And the Iranians know that. That explains why they “endorsed” Hagel. That, alone, should dis-appoint him.

If Obama has his ways, if he succeeds in splitting the GOP , now in disarray, he will pursue his agenda, unaccountable to anyone. If he, at least, qualified as a “benevolent despot” or a “philosopher king” who, in a limited time, could wave a magic wand and heal the Republic, one might be tempted to let him reign supreme. But, as we explained previously, that is not the case.

It is the duty and moral obligation of the media to report the truth, the good, the bad, and the ugly about any public-servant politician including the president. If they wish to opine , they may do so, uninhibited, in their editorials.

It is the duty and the moral obligation of the public-servant elected representatives to challenge the president and go to the Supreme Court any time he violates the laws or the Constitution ( the partial amnesty to illegal aliens and waiving the requirement to work for welfare recipients are two cases in point in which the president  “amended” laws by decree, circumventing the Congress; and ,recently, a US Court of Appeals struck “recess appointments” by the president as unconstitutional.)

I appeal to the president to do what he preaches : cease the campaigning and start governing, by exercising real leadership as demanded by his august office. Only he can reach out to the other side and together, aided with non-partisan experts, find optimal solutions to the enormous problems threatening the country, through the necessary compromises, first and foremost the economy !! (If you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, set aside for a time “immigration” and “guns” so as not to distract from the Balanced Budget, the Tax Code,Deficits and National Debt, Unemployment and Poverty that can make a civilization melt away.

Occam’s Razor Principle teaches that when there are many different solutions, the simple one is usually the best.*
Yetiv is a freelance writer and lecturer in La Jolla, California.  He may be contacted via isaac.yetiv@sdjewishworld.com