What Difference Does It Make

To shed focus on Benghazigate, the Obama Administration has trotted out its tired standby of not taking responsibility and blaming everyone but themselves for current affairs. Namely, its predecessor and, specifically, former President George W. Bush – four years after he left office – using Iraq as example. Let's compare. One president and his administration used their judgment and multiple, vetted intelligence sources to send the American military into Iraq to oust a ruthless dictator who had been, and continued to be, a threat since the 1980s. Democrats and liberals prefer to cite the body count and financial cost of the conflict rather than the overall goal of a stabilized Iraq, and Middle East, in the broader War on Terror. Whether that outcome is still viable has yet to be weighed by history. 

Meantime, another president and his administration rushed to judgment blaming an obscure YouTube video despite multiple intelligence sources, including those on the ground under threat at the time, that Benghazi was a terrorist attack by Islamist extremists on the anniversary of 9/11. As a result, four Americans – one a U.S. ambassador – died pleading with administration officials for military intervention. In the aftermath, administration officials have spent months absconding from and contradicting the facts – either from official testimony or eyewitness accounts – concerning the incident. Democrats and liberals prefer to cite the ever-changing narrative and talking points rather than face the implications of a failed foreign policy. 

Great leadership is taking little more than your share of blame and little less share of credit. Clearly, President Obama and his minions think it's the opposite. 

There indeed is a difference. 

©2013 Steve Sagarra