Leaks have become commonplace in recent years, with institutions such as the CIA, FBI, State Department, Justice Department, and even the Pentagon seemingly rife with turncoats.

In their desperation to somehow topple the Bush administration, the left is showing its true colors.  The Internet is abuzz with feverish e-mails calling on subscribers to demand the immediate firing or imprisonment of said “rightwing” villain.  Backgrounds must be checked and investigations initiated immediately.  Stalin would have been proud.

Democrats are prone to expressing such outrage via press conferences and the constant hubbub has the effect of keeping them in the media spotlight.  Indeed, if all one consulted for their news was television, they would be under the impression that Democratic Senator Harry Reid was the Senate Majority Leader, not Republican Bill Frist.  The Democrats may have the mainstream media on their side, but they can take credit for whipping up a lot of the frenzy on their own.  Republicans in contrast, tend to get lost in the din.  

Leftist readers will no doubt disagree, but the truth is, Republicans are way too nice.  The gentlemanly approach is all well and good and at times it serves the purpose of casting the other guy as rabble-rouser, but when you’re swimming with sharks it simply doesn’t cut it.  The belief that convictions alone are enough to survive in politics is afflicting too many Republicans and they are fading into the woodwork.

Democrats on the other hand are fond of calling commissions and they do so at the slightest provocation.  While hearings are held and commissions are formed to discuss such non-events as the Valerie Plame “leak,” Republicans let serious transgressions go by with nary a whimper. 

The list of missed opportunities is a long one and includes such whoppers as former Clinton national security advisor Sandy Berger stealing and destroying copies of National Archive documents that were to be presented to the 9/11 Commission.  No doubt Berger was trying to conceal his administration’s ineptitude in dealing with the growing menace of Islamic terrorism.  This criminal behavior was met not with criminal charges, but rather probation, community service and a fine, all because of a pardon from the president. One has to wonder what deals were made to secure a simple slap on the wrist for Berger.

Yet another missed opportunity for Republicans was provided by the New York Times last week.  Just as the Iraqi election was getting underway and the Patriot Act renewal was imminent, the Times dropped what it pretended was a bombshell.  The president of the United States authorized spying on American citizens after 9/11!  In actuality, the government implemented already existing policies in order to wiretap international phone calls between foreign operatives and al-Qaeda agents in the U.S.  This came in the wake of an unprecedented attack on this country, which explains why congressional leaders approved the policy at the time.

We now know that the Clinton administration conducted surveillance on all electronic communication throughout the 1990s with a top-secret program called Echelon.  And this was done without a court order.  Yet for some reason, this caused little consternation among today’s handwringers.

Also unremarked on by such partisans was the fact that James Risen, the New York Times reporter who co-wrote the spying article, had a Bush-bashing book coming out the very same day. Were Times editors really so arrogant that they thought people wouldn’t figure it out?

While President Bush stood by his surveillance policy during a recent press conference, going so far as to call the Times leak, “a shameful act,” thus far he hasn’t called for an investigation.  Likewise, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke out forcefully on the issue during an interview on Fox News Sunday, but when asked what the administration would do in response she hedged the question.  Meanwhile, Democrats and their trusty allies the ACLU, are already demanding an investigation into the bogus spying charges and rumors of “impeachment” abound.

If there was ever a time that the Bush administration held the higher ground this is it.  But it’s not enough to be morally indignant.  Once in a while action is called for.  If nothing else, it would be nice to know who leaked the classified information to the Times.  The Times describes their sources as “a dozen current and former officials who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, [and who] discussed it with reporters for the New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.”  Unfortunately, their “concerns” seem not to have extended to breaking the law by leaking the information in the first place.

The same issue came up in November when the Washington Post ran an article exposing alleged CIA “black sites” in Eastern Europe where terrorist suspects were being secretly detained. The Bush administration denied the existence of these prisons, as did several Eastern European leaders.  Condoleezza Rice then embarked on a diplomatic mission to reassure European critics.  But instead of going on the defensive, the administration should have devoted its energies to finding out just who leaked this classified information.

Such leaks have become commonplace in recent years, with institutions such as the CIA, FBI, State Department, Justice Department, and even the Pentagon seemingly rife with turncoats.  The leaks are damaging to the national security of the country and as such, should be treated as treason.  It’s not enough to fire some lower-level fall guy or to promote them, as is often sadly the tradition.  If a crime has been committed then someone should go to prison.  How about applying justice where it’s truly needed for a change, rather than the politically motivated witch-hunts of the left. 

To its credit, the Bush administration seems to have overcome earlier shortcomings in the public relations department and has been going on the offensive against critics of the Iraq war at last.  After years of complaints on the part of conservative commentators and constituents, the Bush administration is finally standing up for its policies.  But the damage has been done and only a continual presence in the media and constant reiterations of foreign policy will make up for lost time.  The administration simply cannot afford to ignore the necessity of engaging Democrats in the media spotlight. 

Judging by the president’s speech on December 18, which some pundits have compared to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s WWII “Fireside Chats,” he’s on the right track.  This is important, for winning the propaganda battle is not only good domestic policy; it’s essential to the nation’s security in a time of war. 

As radio host Mark Levin puts it, “Conservatism wins when it’s properly articulated.”  Now, if we only had a few more Republicans willing to articulate it.