The Media's Double Standard 

Yesterday I pointed out how shocking it was to watch the president launch into a raw political attack on conservatives while a dozen people were shot dead just a few miles away at the Washington Navy Yard. At the time of Obama's speech, police still believed that two gunmen were on the loose and they had no clue yet as to what had happened. 

Just imagine if Tea Party activists had chosen to go ahead with a rally on Capitol Hill accusing Barack Obama of "hurting people" through Obamacare or his other failed economic policies while parts of Washington were under lockdown and a massive manhunt was underway. 

The evening news broadcasts would have been dominated by split screens of ambulances leaving the murder scene and whichever conservative happened to be speaking to the rally at the time. Obama and many reporters in Washington would have been quick to denounce conservative insensitivity. 

But when you're a liberal in this town, there is a different standard. 

Today on Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough asked his liberal audience to consider the reaction if George W. Bush had launched into a partisan speech accusing Democrats of "hurting people," moments after a mass murder had occurred not far from the White House. At least one liberal journalist was willing to concede that Scarborough had a point. Watch the exchange here. 

Another Security Failure 

Washington is picking up the pieces from yesterday's shooting at the Navy Yard. I just learned moments ago that one of those killed was the father of three girls who attend the church Carol and I belong to. 

Authorities have concluded there was only one shooter, Aaron Alexis. At this stage, the investigation is raising more questions than it is answering. Here's the main concern: It appears that Alexis's rampage represents yet another security failure of common sense. 

Alexis, a former Navy reservist, had a history of insubordination and disorderly conduct. He had two prior arrests for inappropriately discharging fire arms, one of which occurred during an "anger-fueled blackout." He was under treatment by the Veterans Administration for mental health issues, including hearing voices. Yet he was employed as a military contractor and had a security clearance that gave him access to a key U.S. Navy facility. 

Hardly a day goes by that does not involve a disturbing new disclosure about the massive amounts of information the federal government is collecting on Americans in our post-9/11 world. For example, did you know that the federal government plans on tracking virtually every financial transaction? 

And yet the same federal bureaucracy that wants to know if you buy a new pair of shoes or a house, failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing, even though it had specific warnings about Tamerlan Tsarnaev from foreign intelligence services. After a few perfunctory inquiries, the jihadi brothers dropped off the radar screen. 

It was unable to deal with the warning signs of Nidal Hasan, Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning, who is so disturbed he can't even figure out which sex he is. 

Don't worry. I'm sure these bureaucrats will do a bang-up job running your health care starting October 1st. 

But You Are Worried 

A new Fox News poll finds that 68% of Americans are concerned about their health care under Obamacare. Just 35% want to leave Obamacare in place. In fact, even Warren Buffett now opposes Obamacare. Only 38% of Americans approve of President Obama's handling of health care issues. 

He doesn't fare better on other issues, either: 39% approve of Obama's handling of foreign policy and 37% approve of his performance on the economy. 

In addition, a Gallup poll released Friday found that faith in the government has reached all-time lows. According to Gallup, just 49% of Americans have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the government to handle international problems, while just 42% trust it to handle domestic issues properly. 

Benghazi Stonewalling Continues 

CIA Director John Brennan recently assured congressional leaders that CIA officials would be made available to speak with committee staff investigating the 2012 attacks against our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. In a letter to the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Brennan also denied a CNN report claiming that agents were being pressured into silence. 

But Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who is calling for a select committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks, insists that is not true. The Washington Free Beacon reports that Rep. Wolf has spoken to an attorney representing a CIA employee who was suspended after refusing to sign a non-disclosure agreement related to Benghazi. 

Obviously the facts as described by the administration and Rep. Wolf cannot both be true. Someone is wrong. Given that congressional investigators, despite repeated demands, have been unable to interview the survivors of the Benghazi attack for over a year now, the evidence strongly suggests that Rep. Wolf is correct and that administration continues to obstruct this investigation.