The Wall Street Journal printed a column today by one of its regular writers on how Obama Dead Eyes isn't dealing with "realism" on Iran, so I took it a step further in a letter to the editor below.
Bret Stephens’ skepticism of President Obama’s “realism” hits the nail on the head.
But to understand Mr. Obama’s Neville Chamberlain approach to dictators, we must dig further into morality and philosophy – and, hence, make a more biting judgment of Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats.
The Democrats and their president suffer from the moral relativism that the philosopher Ayn Rand correctly identified a half-century ago in American politics. This aversion to absolute right and wrong belies a philosophy of skepticism of human efficacy and hegemony that is the foundation of individual rights, thereby leading the Democrats to foster statism at home and subconsciously sympathize with its brethren, extreme statism, abroad. How can any rational American expect a president who commits grand larceny of citizens for “bailouts” or attempts the overthrow of laissez-faire in industry to be amendable to the desires of liberty-seeking citizens in Iran?
This skepticism of citizens’ fundamental rights leads to a crippled judgment of despots and to such inanities as “we are for democracy in Iran,” instead of an authoritative and decisive, “The Iranian leaders have shown themselves to be murderers and gross violators of individual rights.”
The U.S. has bombs gathering dust, and ilk like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are smirking with the knowledge that the dusty U.S. Democrats have no plans to learn and practice a philosophy of dust-busting absolutism.