“On Thursday, while in Pakistan, Secretary of State John F. Kerry was asked in an interview how the United States — a champion of democracy around the world — can justify supporting Egypt’s military crackdown. Mr. Kerry’s reply was inexplicable. He said, “The military was asked to intervene by millions and millions of people, all of whom were afraid of a descendance into chaos, into violence. And the military did not take over, to the best of our judgment so far. To run the country, there’s a civilian government. In effect, they were restoring democracy.” It is one thing to be cautious and avoid using the word “coup,” which could trigger a cutoff of Egypt’s $1.5 billion annual U.S. aid package. But it is quite another to assert that Egypt’s military is “restoring democracy” when it has just removed an elected president from power.”
—–The Editorial Board of The Washington Post last week, expressing consternation at Sec. of State John Kerry’s double-talk regarding Egypt
Yes, the “quite another” thing that the Post dare not name is called “lying your fool head off.” Perhaps you prefer, “acting as if everyone in the world is an idiot.” Or better yet, “destroying any last shred of credibility the Obama Administration may have.” John Kerry, of course, as anyone who followed his 2004 presidential campaign with his hand-picked President-in-Waiting, John Edwards knows, already has none.
The Secretary of State of the United States of America, with a straight face and carrying the authority of the Obama Administration, actually said that a military coup—which is, you know, and everybody knows, is what this was—“restored democracy”! Never mind that history has witnessed many, many military coups—a couple in Egypt, in fact—and they virtually never “restore democracy,” nor was there a smidgen of a chance that this one would. But the Post betrays its pose of objectivity when its calls Kerry’s ridiculously dishonest statement “inexplicable.” Kerry has spoken in oxymorons his whole political life, and in a profession of flip-floppers, he is the flip-floppiest….tolerable in a U.S. Senator, perhaps, dangerous in a Secretary of State. What is truly inexplicable, and the Post was too Democratic to say so at the time, is why, in a period of foreign policy challenges as daunting as any since the Cold War, President Obama could turn to a proven mediocrity like John Kerry without both parties and anyone who has been conscious for the past 20 years not leaping to their feet and crying, “NOOOOO!”
I hate to be a spoil sport, but a statement like Kerry’s unaccompanied by a swift “What??? I’m sorry, everyone, I appear to have appointed a drooling idiot as my Secretary of State! He’s toast, and I’m going to install, let’s see, this electric pencil sharpener in the post while I search for someone who doesn’t spout utter nonsense and expect anyone to believe it” from the President is signature significance for an Administration that does not value the truth—but then—right, Susan Rice? Lois Lerner? James Clapper?—we already knew that.
(By the way, Mr. Secretary, the word you want is “descent,’ not “descendance.” If George Bush has said that, Saturday Night Live would have flogged it for a year.)
Graphic: Today Online