Columns

Disillusioned with Obama, Will Media Investigate Benghazi?

By: Mona Charen | Posted: November 5, 2013 3:55 AM
Mona Charen

The question many on the left are asking as they witness the Obama administration flail in response to HealthCare.gov's debut disaster is: How could this happen? Obama is so brilliant, so capable and so wise. How could he bungle his signature initiative?

He isn't, but even if he were, it wouldn't make a particle of difference. One of the central delusions of progressives is that government is efficient and effective and that complex human societies are amenable to centralized control and direction.

We on the right presume government ineptitude. The Washington Post reports today, for example, that the federal employee retirement system paid more than $400 million in benefits over the past few years to deceased retirees. On the same page, we learn that despite the U.S. government's $7 billion investment in combating heroin cultivation in Afghanistan, the trade is booming. Last week, the Brookings Institution published a study suggesting that Cash for Clunkers was a failure, costing taxpayers $1.4 million for each of the 3,676 jobs created.

This is normal. There are common-sense reasons for it -- explanations available to most students of Econ 101. Those spending other people's money have very little incentive to economize or seek top value. Nor can central bureaucrats possibly have enough information to make wise decisions about something as complex as one-sixth of a $16 trillion economy. As Friedrich A. Hayek cautioned: "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."

Discovering that government lacks competence in many areas is what caused a critical group of liberal intellectuals to become the "neo-conservatives" in the 1970s and 1980s. Irving Kristol, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Norman Podhoretz, Michael Novak and others were not moved only by anti-Communism. They were first chastened by studying the failures of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.

As for the other story of the past month: as to the media's discovery that Obama is untruthful, we conservatives are adamantly unshocked.

Observing the left's confusion about the emperor's lack of clothes is perhaps a clarifying moment. Liberal journalists who until now had covered for Barack Obama, rationalized his failures, explained away his misrepresentations, and believed in his integrity seem shaken. The "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan" vow was so clearly a blatant lie that even the Praetorian Guard of White House correspondents is reporting on it accurately.

Since the armor now has sunlight streaming through it, perhaps the fifth estate will re-examine other pivotal moments of the Obama years girded with their newly acquired skepticism.

Start with Benghazi. "60 Minutes" has revisited the story. It's more than a year late, but come on in, the water's fine. There were so many lies told about Benghazi that investigative reporters could be kept busy for years tracking them all. The president of the United States maintained for two weeks after the attack that he couldn't possibly say whether it was terrorism or not, though the CIA acknowledged that it knew within hours that the attack was planned and coordinated. President Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton blamed the attack on an Internet video that "insulted the Prophet," so as to avoid criticism for failing to provide security and to prevent the press from interpreting the Benghazi attack as a refutation of Obama's claim that al-Qaida was essentially defeated. Those were not shadings of the truth or diplomatic doublespeak. They were lies.

The president also claimed that he ordered that everything possible be done to save the Americans who were under attack. Yet no one has ever seen such an order. The press hasn't bothered to ask for evidence of it. Perhaps they trusted his word. Do they still? Are they not curious about why the administration did nothing to come to the aid of Americans under fire? Beyond the lies, that is a scandalous breach of trust, as is the president's promise -- uttered with campaign-inflected intensity -- to find the people who killed four Americans "because one of the things that I've said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after them."

It's been 14 months. Is this government incompetence or another lie? Someone should ask.



To find out more about Mona Charen and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.


COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM


Tags: News, Columns

Comments (3)

howiem
10:11AM NOV 14TH 2013
Another excellent column, but why is the media dropping the word, "period" after "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". Is it because Period was embarrassed to be used in a lie?
Freeman
12:16PM NOV 5TH 2013
Get Darrel Issa to investigate why,,,I'm out of toilet paper.
Frank
9:59AM NOV 5TH 2013
Perhaps you didn't get the message . . . . he's no longer running . . . so this must be meant for someone else . . . Hillary, demonizing three years in advance . . . why aren't we surprised . . . . that's ok . . . we know the far right will ultimately self-destruct when left on their own . . . what with their legitimate rape, 6000 year-old earth and the like . . . . and now the latest in a long line foot-in-mouth disease from the far right . . . . bringing back slavery if that's the desire of your rural constituents (from an elected GOP member from Nevada) . . . . .

There's a reason why none of these Obama scandals (IRS, Benghazi, etc.) are catching fire with the American public . . . . truthiness spin-based politics of the "Big Lie" . . . . . .

Pathetic . . . .

Leave a Comment on This Story

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.