Home  |   Jihad Watch  |   Horowitz  |   Archive  |   Columnists  |     DHFC  |  Store  |   Contact  |   Links  |   Search Thursday, October 30, 2014
FrontPageMag Article
Write Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article
Font:
Obama’s Latest Radical at the Defense Department By: John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, May 12, 2009


On April 9th, op-ed columnist and Georgetown University law professor Rosa Brooks penned her final piece for the Los Angeles Times, the newspaper for which she had written on a regular basis since 2005. Her gig at the Times served as a nice steppingstone to a bigger and better professional frontier, namely her recent appointment by President Barack Obama to be an advisor to Michelle Fluornoy, the U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. At this moment in history,” Brooks gushes, “I can’t imagine anything more rewarding than being part of the new team that’s shaping U.S. policy.”

Brooks’ credentials as a far-leftist are impeccable.

For one, she is the daughter of author Barbara Ehrenreich, the Honorary Chairwoman of the Democratic Socialists of America who has lauded Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto.

In 2004
Brooks served as a foreign-policy advisor to the John Kerry-John Edwards presidential campaign.

She also has been a special counsel to the president at George Soros Open Society Institute, which donates scores of millions of dollars annually to groups promoting open borders, a dramatic expansion of the welfare state, and the notion that
America is institutionally an oppressive, imperialistic country.

She was a consultant for Human Rights Watch, which reflexively blames the U.S. and Israel for the lion’s share of international disputes around the world.

She was a board member of Amnesty International 
USA, which likewise finds fault with virtually every American foreign-policy decision.

And she was a senior advisor to Assistant Secretary Harold Koh at the U.S. State Department during the Bill Clinton administration. Koh is an advocate of transnationalism, a concept that argues in favor of “global governance” as opposed to the constitutional sovereignty of
U.S. law.

In April 2006, Brooks accused civilian White House and Pentagon officials in the George W. Bush administration of being “eager to embrace the values normally exemplified by military juntas.” Six months later, she likened the experience of being a citizen in President Bush’s
America “to being a passenger in a car driven by a drunk driver.” “Drunk on power,” she said, “the administration has spent years driving resolutely into brick walls.”

In a September 2006 L.A. Times column, Brooks referred to President Bush as America’s “torturer-in-chief,” and she suggested that Islamist terror attacks against the U.S. were nothing more than reprisals against America’s foreign transgressions. “Today, the chickens are coming home to roost,” she said. By making this charge, she demonstrated no understanding whatsoever of the long and ugly history of jihad in Islamic tradition. 

Fiercely opposed to the Iraq War, in October 2006 Brooks characterized the Bush administration’s handling of the conflict as “desperate flailing.” “[W]ith so many thousands dead, and so many thousands more embittered, ‘winning’ isn’t really on the table anymore,” she wrote. “The only question now is whether we can mitigate the damage.”

In an October 2006 column, Brooks described the Bush administration as a “homegrown” authoritarian government, likening its practices to those of the “foreign authoritarians” who headed the ruling regimes of
Iran and North Korea. In Brooks' view, President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were men who “should be treated like psychotics who need treatment.”

In 2007 Brooks portrayed al-Qaida as an organization that, prior to 9/11, had been “little more than an obscure group of extremist thugs, well financed and intermittently lethal but relatively limited in their global and regional political pull.” “On 9/11,” she continued, “they [al-Qaida] got lucky.… Thanks to
U.S. policies, al-Qaida has become the vast global threat the [Bush] administration imagined it to be in 2001.”

Also in 2007, Brooks depicted the troop surge (where President Bush sent more than 20,000 additional military personnel to
Iraq) as a “feckless plan” that was “too little, too late” and had “no realistic likelihood” of leading to “an enduring solution in Iraq.” Subsequent events, of course, would prove Brooks wrong; the surge turned the tide of the war dramatically in America’s favor.

In October 2008, as polls indicated that Barack Obama was likely to win the
U.S. presidency over Republican John McCain, Brooks gloated:

“Liberals haven’t had so much fun in decades…. Maybe most fun of all, we’re getting to watch a steady procession of rats leaving the sinking GOP ship.... [A]s the more respectable, literate conservatives distance themselves from the GOP, increasingly, the only ones left on the right are paranoid, rage-driven, xenophobic nuts. Bitter? You betcha! Twisted too!... But today, as the last few sober grown-ups leave the party, the visible face of the GOP increasingly looks like that of the people who shout ‘kill him!’ when Obama’s name comes up, who speak of black men they don’t like as ‘uppity’ or as ‘boys,’ who think you can’t trust a Muslim or an Arab,… who claim Obama ‘pals around with terrorists.’”

In March 2009 Brooks denigrated the legal memos wherein the Bush administration’s Office of Legal Counsel had advanced its arguments in favor of prosecuting the war on terrorism. According to Brooks, those memos were as replete with calculated deception as Hitler’s stated rationales for war had been in the 1930s and 1940s. Said Brooks:

“How did such dangerously bad legal memos ever get taken seriously in the first place? One answer is suggested by the so-called Big Lie theory of political propaganda, articulated most infamously by Adolf Hitler. Ordinary people ‘more readily fall victim to the big lie than the small lie,’ wrote Hitler.”

In April 2009 Brooks called for an added measure of “direct government support for public media,” and for the federal government to take control of journalism by means of an industry-wide financial bailout for failing newspapers. She wrote:

“If newspapers become mostly infotainment websites -- if the number of well-trained investigative journalists dwindles still further -- and if we’re soon left with nothing but the yapping heads who dominate cable ‘news’ and talk radio, how will we recognize, or hope to forestall, impending national and global crises?... It’s time for a government bailout of journalism. If we’re willing to use taxpayer money to build roads, pay teachers and maintain a military; if we’re willing to bail out banks and insurance companies and failing automakers, we should be willing to part with some public funds to keep journalism alive too.”

Toward that end, Brooks endorsed an idea advanced by John Nichols (a writer for The Nation) and former Monthly Review editor Robert McChesney, who had jointly recommended: (a) substantial increases in government funding for public broadcasting, and (b) a tax credit for the first $200 that any person spent on newspaper subscriptions each year.

Brooks also has been outspoken on the subject of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the
Middle East, placing most of the blame for the ongoing hostility squarely on Israel. In January 2009, while Israel was engaged in a military operation aimed at dismantling the military capabilities of Hamas (which had been conducting a campaign of unceasing terrorist attacks against the Jewish state), Brooks wrote a column titled “Israel can’t bomb its way to peace.” She claimed that Israel’s actions were motivated by political rather than security considerations.

In summation, Rosa Brooks has cultivated intimate ties to numerous organizations that view
America as the seed-bed of all international strife. She has depicted, in no uncertain terms, the Bush administration as a collection of deranged, unintelligent, bloodthirsty Nazis. She supports a massive expansion of government coupled with an ever-diminishing realm of private enterprise. And she sees Israeli intransigence, rather than Arab jihadism, as the chief cause of disharmony in the Middle East.

In short, she is tailor-made for a lofty post in the Obama administration.


John Perazzo is the Managing Editor of DiscoverTheNetworks and is the author of The Myths That Divide Us: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race Relations. For more information on his book, click here. E-mail him at WorldStudiesBooks@gmail.com



We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by Disqus




Home | Blog | Horowitz | Archives | Columnists | Search | Store | Links | CSPC | Contact | Advertise with Us | Privacy Policy

Copyright©2007 FrontPageMagazine.com