http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/10/23/vigilant-obama-is-not-even-awake/ By Jennifer Rubin October 23 at 9:00 AM
In the wake of the shootings in Canada, the president said that “it emphasizes the degree to which we have to remain vigilant when it comes to dealing with these kinds of acts of senseless violence or terrorism.” The president has said we must be vigilant many times, but does he follow his own advice?
A dictionary definition of vigilance is “the action or state of keeping careful watch for possible danger or difficulties.” But in the 21st century we must do more than wait around, peering into the haze to see if we can spot the terrorists before they clamber over the wall. It means anticipating trouble. And this the president has not done. President Obama is always shocked and surprised, the opposite reaction of someone who has been vigilant all along.
Libya had been overrun by terrorists in the summer of 2012 but the president was surprised when they killed our people in Benghazi, so surprised the White House latched onto the “video made them do it” rationale.
The administration is “shocked” when Russian President Vladimir Putin lies and invades his neighbor. The president and his advisers are “surprised” when Russia makes trouble in Syria.
And most recently Obama pronounced it a surprise that in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq (that he was warned not to undertake) and after three years of passivity regarding Syria (that he was warned to snap out of), the Islamic State swept across the Middle East.
And with regard to Ebola, neither he nor his advisers seemed very alarmed when hundreds and then thousands of Africans were infected and died. One would expect a “citizen of the world” to be more alarmed and understand virulent diseases don’t respect borders.
He is among the least vigilant presidents in memory, always learning about scandals in the newspaper and surprised when aggressors act like aggressors. If he is being vigilant, he’s looking out for the wrong things. He should have been paying attention to the geographic spread of jihadis throughout North Africa, to Iran’s intransigence and aggressive promotion of terror, to Putin’s expressed desire to recreate the Russian empire, to China’s territorial assertiveness, to our allies who complain openly about our fecklessness, to the Israelis who warn that Iran’s Hamas and Sunni extremists are two sides of the same coin of fundamentalist terror, and to three successive secretaries of defense who cautioned against deep Pentagon cuts. Forget hyper-vigilance; this president has not been paying attention when problems and threats shine like neon lights.
For a president, “vigilance” cannot be “if you see an unattended package, please report it.” It cannot be merely to see if your seat mate on the plane from West Africa is feverish. The job comes long before events manifest themselves in death, disaster and panic. Real vigilance and leadership require you scan the horizon, think a few steps ahead, anticipate that evil regimes will be evil and understand simply wishing it so does not end wars. Shell-shocked by beheadings, Ebola and war, the public is plenty vigilant. Now we need a president who is.