Welcome Back, Carter

When Lech Walesa headed the Solidarity movement in Soviet besieged Poland, President Ronald Reagan had a choice: Support the Soviet backed domination of the Polish people or take a stand and support the voice of individual liberty, and in doing so potentially anger the Soviets. It was not a hard choice, and at the first opportunity he sided with Poland's Solidarity movement, drawing a line that stated in no uncertain terms where America stood.

Obama has now been witness to a similar historical event and given a golden opportunity to prove his critics wrong. However...he has let this terrific opportunity languish for too long and spoiled his chances of directly benefiting from it. When the "elections" in Iran took place and a sizable portion of the oppressed population took to the street, it gave him the perfect moment in time to come out in favor of genuine democracy and reform in the country which is responsible for more funding and personal acts of terrorism in the world. Iran - without equivocation - is at the heart of Islamic terrorism. He didn't take the opportunity to come down on the side of freedom. Instead, Obama initially opted to say that the United States was not going to interfere with the Iranian elections by injecting themselves into the debate. That statement had an expiration date of about one week. Now, the stance has changed by reaching out to the dictatorial leadership calling for nicer treatment of the demonstrators. From some of the footage I am seeing on TV, they aren't interested in listening.

The current Iranian government is hostile to the entire western world. The nuanced conventional wisdom that states that picking sides in their internal conflict can be a political risk is a fake argument. When you take a stand and voice support of the struggle for freedom and democracy in a country controlled by people who don't want to grant it - you win regardless of the outcome.

However - when you hold up your hands and instead opt to initially voice a vague, neutral Switzerland policy when presented with a choice between supporting the dictatorial status quo or young people wanting to reform their country for the better - it is a tremendous lost opportunity, because those people looking for support in the cause of freedom look at the US and genuinely want our support. It goes with the Compass theory: The US should first and always base their stances on the advancement of liberty over tyranny. From the Mullah's point of view, that initial wishy-washy response and subsequent attempt at a clarification only weakened Obama's hand.

For the record, I don't think Obama is out there wearing "I love Mullahs" tee-shirts. He will at some point discover that his changing stances on an issue will only erode any credibility he has left when he comes to the realization that support for liberty is a football he can't just punt to someone else.

When it comes to choosing and voicing support for individual liberty over tyranny -the choice should be easy and unwaveringly clear.