Thursday, October 25, 2012


   Network Media broadcasters, in the waning days of Election 2012, make it their business to remind Americans of the term “October Surprise”. A fixture of political talk since President Lyndon Baines Johnson's Vietnam assist to Vice President Hubert Humphrey in 1968. October Surprise is a news event that has the power to influence the voters' reaction to a candidate. Most expected, in this Presidential Election, that the Media would report some event that would garner significant advantage to President Barack Hussein Obama's Campaign. However, the real news is that the October Surprise occurred in September, has revealed Obama's foreign policy failures and brought his campaign to a virtual death knelt. What the Obama Administration knew and when they knew it will reveal with certainty whether they are lying about the circumstances that impacted the deaths of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans or if they incompetently left the US Consulate at Benghazi, Libya and other American embassies and consulates around the world vulnerable to attack. “We the People” are called upon every four years to invest our Trust in one amongst us that will focus on Truth rather than semantics and Leadership rather than rhetoric.

   The greatest revelation about the “Surprise” is that Americans seek a World Leader that takes responsibility and executes a strategy to protect our citizens. Four weeks passed after the September 11, 2012 terrorist event and neither the White House nor State Department had taken full responsibility for the mishaps in preparation, security and intelligence. On his last day on Earth, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens requested additional security for fear of losing his life. The terrorist attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was troubling in itself. That Congress budgeted more than $2 billion for security enhancements to embassy and consulate around the world and yet, rejected the US Ambassador's request is quite unsettling. Stevens did not mention a YouTube video denigrating the Prophet Muhammad. The video is the Administration's defense throughout Benghazi-Gate. The Wall Street Journal's James Rosen writes:
“In Tuesday night's debate with Mitt Romney, President Obama claimed to have "told" the American people that Benghazi was a terror attack the very next day, Sept. 12, when speaking from the Rose Garden. The assertion was untrue, despite moderator Candy Crowley's ruling to the contrary. The president had only spoken generally of terror attacks, and Benghazi would have been understood to fall under that umbrella only if it had been acknowledged as a terror attack. “ [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444868204578062420490...]
The terrorist attack was curiously planned for September 11. 2012. A time when Americans, and even Israel, remember the onset of our War on Terror with the destruction of New York's famed Twin Towers by militant terrorists on September 11, 2001. Yet, Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed aloof and unable to give a reasoned response for the episode that resulted in the death of four Americans and the first US Ambassador killed in an attack since President Jimmy Carter's administration in 1979.

   Why would a sitting President not accept responsibility immediately and employ a strategy to retaliate against the militants? Why would the State Department not provide a war zone Ambassador adequate protection? Why did Obama, Clinton and Biden not know that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had determined that this was a terrorist act within 24 hours of the event? Obama and his Administration seem so weak in their Benghazi-Gate defense that voters believe either they are lying in order to increase their chances for political victory or are incompetent in executing foreign policy. Once blaming Governor Mitt Romney for politicizing the Benghazi attacks, the Obama Administration finds itself, according to the Associated Press, under political pressure to respond militarily in Libya for the attacks. This leaves the Administration appearing to be more reactive than proactive in executing military and foreign policy options. When one is proactive on the world stage, he appears to be a Master of topics. When one is reactive, he appears to be a foil-able Student. After four years, the American voter seeks a Master rather than student. Voters depend on the integrity, ability and strength of the one that will receive their trust. Voters also depend on truth rather than talking points for matters of security. The problem is that Democrat leaders have not reverenced the surety of the voter. James Carville once advised:
“The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn't have a clue than there were Republicans.
Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you're smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That's why I'm a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to."

Unfortunately, the greatest misgiving that the Obama Administration may not want to acknowledge but is quite profound is that the 2012 Presidential Election Voter is not as dumb and lazy as many expected them to be and certainly want to know what is true rather than acceptable platform talking points. We the People want Trust and Truth not reckless abandon for political gain.  Americans are determining that they can not find it in Obama, Biden or Clinton.

No comments:

Post a Comment