First, you need to read David Brooks's latest New York Times op-ed entitled "When Governments Go Bad" (http://wap.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/opinion/brooks-when-governments-go-bad.html), which ends on a highly philosophical note:
"People can only have faith in a government that self-restrains, and there’s little evidence of that now."
Fascinating . . . yawn. I used to tell my children that they need to "self-restrain," but a lot of good that did.
Who cares about children? How can I possibly compare children with government? Give it a little thought. In any event, back to the JG Caesarea Challenge Round! You've read the op-ed and you want to be a winner, so tell us what's missing. A hint: This time, it's two things.
Five, four, three, one . . . Time's over! (Not The New York Times, silly - Chapter 11 is still a little ways off.) Drop your pencils!
Sorry, what's that you say? What happened to "two"? Like the IRS and the Justice Department, I don't play fair. In addition, I already told you that "two" are missing.
The answers . . . a drum roll please . . .
First, Benghazi goes ignored by Brooks. We already know that Brooks is unhappy that everyone is picking on his friend Victoria Nuland (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/opinion/brooks-the-next-scapegoat.html?_r=0), but is that any reason to forget this Libyan brewhaha?
As observed today by Charles Krauthammer (yes, I know he's a neocon, but he's still pretty smart . . .) in a Washington Post opinion piece entitled "Redacted truth, subjunctive outrage" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-redacted-truth-subjunctive-outrage/2013/05/16/de28aee8-be64-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html#):
"Just hours into the Benghazi assault, Hicks reports, by phone to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton herself, on the attack with absolutely no mention of any demonstration or video, later to become the essence of the Susan Rice talking points that left him 'stunned' and 'embarrassed.'
. . . .
But Hicks is then ordered not to meet with an investigative congressional delegation — the first time in his 22-year career he had been so ordered. And when he speaks with them nonetheless, he gets a furious call from Clinton’s top aide for not having a State Department lawyer (and informant) present.
. . . .
Within 24 hours, the CIA station chief in Libya cabled that it was a terrorist attack and not a spontaneous mob. On Day Two, the acting assistant secretary of state for the Near East wrote an e-mail saying the attack was carried out by an al-Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Sharia.
What were the American people fed? Four days and 12 drafts later, a fiction about a demonstration that never was, provoked by a video that no one saw (Hicks: “a non-event in Libya”), about a movie that was never made."
But heck, maybe it can be argued that Americans, hooked on the adventures of the Kardashian Family, no longer desire the truth, so let's quickly move on to the second "thing" that's missing:
Brooks never once mentions Obama.
Let's ignore Benghazi and just relate to the IRS and AP scandals. Does anyone really want to claim that Obama has no responsibility for what happened? If nothing else, Holder, every bit as dumb as Kerry and Hagel, is his appointee.
What's that you say? I'm not paying attention to Obama's excuse regarding the the IRS that "I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this"?
Hey, man, I thought you're the president, and you're supposed to know better than "most" people. But I suppose this is a variant of the time honored excuse "I didn't know," and we need to cut Obama some "executive privilege." "I didn't know" is sure to play better than "I am not a crook":
"I didn't know" also probably works better than "I didn't do it!"
I'll say this for Obama, this constitutional lawyer sure has pretty damn smart criminal lawyers working for him . . . but not in the Justice Department.
What's that? You got both answers right in this JG Caesarea Challenge Round? Sorry, with the passage of time during this second term of the Obama administration, everyone - right, left and center - is a loser.
And so, keep clicking on this website until the next Challenge Round, which sadly will not be long in coming.
[By the way, I suppose this is as good a time as any to inform He Whose Name Shall Not Be Spoken, I didn't do it . . .]
No comments:
Post a Comment