Google+
Close

The Corner

The one and only.

The DNC Takes a Pass on National Security



Text  



Over the past three days and nights, the nation has had to endure women of all types stepping on stage in Charlotte touting all things great about Barack Obama. There’s the pro-abortion advocate, Cecile Richards. And there’s the pro-Obamacare advocate, Sandra Fluke. And there’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who apparently filled multiple roles at the DNC convention, not the least of which was head of party propaganda. 

All spoke glowingly of some facet of Barack Obama, but when it comes to national security, rather than trotting out, oh, Bill Clinton’s better half, or someone with the stature of a Condoleezza Rice, the Democrats decided to hold an audition for the second-term Cabinet, and have Senator John “Secretary of State in Waiting” Kerry report for duty to defend the Obama foreign-policy record. 

Never mind that Senator Kerry has been just as wrong-headed on foreign-policy issues as Obama. This, after all, is the man who opposed President George H. W. Bush’s use of force in the Persian Gulf in 1991, and doubled down by calling President George W. Bush’s Iraqi surge a “tragic mistake.” He’s the man who is still — despite virtually unanimous opposition — touting the virtues of the Law of the Sea Treaty. And he’s the man who looked into the soul of Syrian thug, Bashar al-Assad, and claimed to know him as a reformer.

#more#When everything is said about this convention, what should be noted is how many different traditionally Democrat constituencies were alienated by these three days in Charlotte: those who believe in God; those who believe in free markets, or just plain freedom; those who believe in Israel. And I’d add those women who put national security next to the economy as their top voting issues in 2012. Just as John Kerry lost “National Security Mom” votes in 2004, he did Barack Obama few favors eight years later . . . and not just because he was the messenger. 

After all, this is the administration that failed to support sanctions against Iran that were strengthened by Congress, and instead sought direct, unconditional talks with Iran. This is the president who initially chose not to support pro-democracy Iranian activists in 2009 and 2010. And this is the president who declined to support a congressionally backed security-cooperation agreement with Israel, and instead sought new preconditions imposed on Israel in peace negotiations that even the Palestinians weren’t asking for (similar to the last-minute tax conditions Obama suggested that spiked the debt-deal agreement with Speaker John Boehner). 

All of this inaction and coddling of radical-Islamic actors has done little for the security of Israel, and emboldened radical groups such as the Taliban, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood, which funds and operates any number of organizations, from schools to youth groups, in the United States.

While a woman’s touch could not have prettied up this record — or the less secure world Barack Obama has helped develop — it at the very least might have created the optics of an administration tuned into a voting bloc that will have a strong voice in the outcome of this election. Those of us “Security Moms” from the ’04 and ’08 cycle care not only about the kitchen-table issues most of our fellow citizens have been focused on over the past four years. We care about the issues that come home to roost from elsewhere around the globe. Republicans in Tampa made it clear that at least they understood that; too bad the Democrats did not.  



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review