Continued from page 2

Why should the American people support leaders who put American interests on equal footing with foreign interests? Aren’t they elected to represent “We the People” … not “We are the World”?

It should be noted that in the current battle against that treaty, The Washington Times, to my knowledge, has been the only major paper that weighed in on the debate against ratification. That is still another reason to celebrate this evening. Too often, silence is tantamount to assent. This is why we need you.

In fact, we need more of you. More journalists and analysts who will report the dangerous signs seen across the globe — from a loss of leverage in Iraq after a diplomatic blunder of the highest order that failed to secure a status of forces agreement, to an Iran policy that lacks coherence, to agreeing to blindly cut some $1 trillion from the defense budget over the coming decade, to a totally botched “reset” button with Russia.

For a moment, recall what the President told Russian President Medvedev — in what was supposed to be a private conversation but was caught by a nearby microphone: President Obama said “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space.  . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Think about that. It’s breathtaking! Here is an American president who claims he is standing strong for vital American interests, but behind closed doors is promising the president of Russia that, if he wins, he’s ready to concede to Putin by abandoning a missile defense system that has its purpose defending our people and our friends and allies.

It says volumes about his lack of respect for the intelligence of the American people. And it screams the question as to what else might he be planning to do after he is no longer accountable to American people?

And last, returning to what I mentioned earlier, we need more thoughtful reporting on what may be the beginning of a revolutionary movement — not an Arab Spring, but an Islamic winter that brings a chill of hatred and violence against the United States.

A few weeks back, Gov. [Mitt] Romney was criticized in the press for bringing up President Obama’s national security record — that was shortly after he was being criticized for slighting foreign policy issues during the campaign. Pundits said it was an inopportune time to criticize the president in the wake of the assassination of the U.S. ambassador to Libya. Utter nonsense! And where was the president after the four Americans and our ambassador were killed in Libya? He flew off to Las Vegas for still another fundraiser, with barely a word of criticism heard.

In every election I have witnessed over the past many decades, foreign policy has played a role. And it should. Indeed it must. In fact, this campaign has focused too little on national security policy. We live in a dangerous world.

Gov. Romney is right to point out the differences in his view of America’s role in the world from the president’s views. And the differences are notable.

We should welcome a critique of the national security policies of the past four years. Someone has to do it. Too often, the press is spoon-fed leaks designed to make the president look decisive. The nation’s secrets are plastered across newspapers, served up as scoops to reporters friendly to the administration.

Within hours of our Special Operations forces taking bin Laden’s body from that compound in Pakistan, operational details of the raid were in the press. As a result, a Pakistani doctor reportedly involved in the operation was arrested and sentenced to prison, where he remains this evening, even as we meet.

And what has to be one of the most classified programs — cyberwarfare tools used against Iran — were confirmed as an American effort by “members of the president’s national security team.”

This kind of airbrushing and distortion of the actual record can be effective — for a while — but I have faith in the American people. They know right from wrong. They have sound inner compasses that, over time, help them sift through scraps of information and make sound judgments. But to do that, they need to be armed with facts. They need to hear from those who tell the truth. That is even more important in this new century given the rapidly growing modes of communication and the flood of information American voters receive. We live in an era where one person can start a false rumor on a blog, and have it span the globe in minutes. As Mark Twain put it, “A lie travels halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its boots on.” And that was in the time of telegraphs, not tweets.

The role of journalists now is more important than ever — to inform, to educate, to give people an opportunity to hear all sides of an argument, to correct falsehoods and puncture myths. That is the hallmark of an outstanding news organization. And that is what Americans have come to expect from The Washington Times — those who read your newspaper every day and the increasing number who follow this paper online. You influence and inform those who shape American and global policy. And you do it the right way — with a commitment to facts, to freedom, and to integrity.

Story Continues →