In today's climate of political theatrics it isn't very easy to figure out where right stands versus wrong. As Ron Paul points out at The Daily Bell, the Benghazi fiasco pretty much amounts to an illustration of the folly of the American government's unending involvement in foreign affairs it should stay out of. The way the Obama Administration works hard to obfuscate its role, how it seems (at least to me, who has been trying to follow the mess) to conduct foreign policy that reminds one of the three stooges, seems to be designed to operate like a magician who wants the audience to focus on distractions, never on essentials.
The idea that occurs to me when confronted with the mess is that those who have even the mildest concern for rhyme and reason should press the Obama people on one central topic: Do the rights of individuals concern this government in the slightest? Obama & Co. appear to view the Benghazi disaster as some kind of game, never mind deaths, casualties, professional responsibilities, etc.
The fact that four individuals were killed appears to be beside the point, merely a move on a chessboard. And that itself appears to me to be the implication of this government's disinterest in the most basic duty of a free government, namely, to secure the protection of the rights of the citizenry. Certainly no one in Washington appears to care about this. Every press conference evades the issue; it seems that the president just wants to wash his hands of any taint of failure, wants to make sure that the opposition party cannot find anything to criticize about his team's conduct in the affair.
What should matter in all this is whether the mandate to the government, contained so clearly in the Declaration of Independence, is that government is instituted so as to secure our rights is being properly fulfilled. It seems clear to me that it isn't. That's basic and very regrettable.