On February 13, 2023, John Kirby appeared with Karine Jean-Pierre at a press conference to “explain” in diplo-speak the reasons for our shooting down the Chinese spy balloon. At best, his remarks could be seen as attempts to mollify the PRC leadership that our shooting down of their balloon was not a hostile act, and in no way an accusation that they were engaged in wrongdoing. Rather, it was just a cautious step on our part, and a minimal response to concerns raised by various parties within our country. In shooting down their “balloon” (keeping in mind that balloons are not intrinsically bad or threatening) we have merely engaged in a minimal response, but we do not intend to feed into hysteria or accusations about the existence of “spying.” After all, we already know the Chinese have space satellites capable of spying, and we are not taking them down. It is not clear that the balloons transversing the USA are adding to the information provided by the pre-existent spy satellites, so we cannot and are not getting our noses out of joint about the balloons even though we shot the balloon down. However, at the same time, for security reasons Kirby said they are not going to go into details about what the balloon managed to discern and transmit. In short, there is nothing so terrible about what the spy balloons actually observed; yet that information is still too dangerous to reveal to the public. This type of speech is usually referred to as speaking out of both sides of one’s mouth.

He has recently outdone these bloated, ambiguous, and ridiculously self-serving comments with public comments about the massive, regular appearance of drones. Responding to questions raised on he “Today Show” about the sighting of so many drones -- with some drones being described as large as refrigerators or even SUVs -- he tried to project a confident, pleasant image as he asserted that these sightings posed no security threat and that that 5000 sightings had already been investigated. To this writer and to other experienced observers of human puffery, he clearly was putting on a false face as he attempted to appear at once like an authority (he holds the title of “Admiral”) and a regular guy (assuming a slight drawl and pronouncing a word ending in “ing” as “in” (thus dropping the g). To the degree possible, he assumed a light, airy style of speech to dispel even a hint of a worrisome tone.

Putting aside the question of how this man with so little gravitas could have the title of Admiral and thus cannot be imagined as being above the captains of actual naval ships is beyond this writer. Perhaps he was Admiral in charge of procuring toilet paper and trash baskets for large numbers of vessels? I don’t know, and it really is not worth researching. However, there are many individuals who do not have his exalted title who nonetheless can come across as more authoritative and more persuasive than Kirby. With this in mind, we can see that the question of whether or not these drones pose a danger to the people of New Jersey, New York, and elsewhere dovetails with the questions of the present Executive Branch’s incredible incompetence.

We have a President who, by his own party’s admission, is too mentally enfeebled to run for office again. He has crossed the line of mental competence that he is not being considered legally responsible for his actions. He was designated as mentally unfit to be tried for clear violations of laws regarding unauthorized taking of classified materials. 

We have a press secretary. who rarely answers questions with prepared facts and reasoned arguments, but responds like a high school junior running for class president by giving wishy-washy word salad answers. How far she is from her predecessor Kayleigh McEnany with her acute, well-researched, and articulate answers to questions reflecting her incredible educational achievements. Kayleigh set the standard. Karine is clearly unqualified. Her speech can be characterized as lazy puffery coming from a cute-faced older teen. Her hair is a distraction as teenage hair often is. Her vocabulary and educational attainments are at best mediocre.

Lastly, we see that VP Kamala Harris proved to be a verbally-challenged candidate who could not express herself at a level of clarity befitting either a VP or a potential President. Compare her, for example, to Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, another well-known Democrat leader. Klobuchar has a bearing of dignity and a penetrating way of speaking and analyzing issues that VP Harris lacks. Compare Harris with Margaret Thatcher, may she rest in peace, who led as British prime minister for many years. She also could speak clearly and with considerable intellectual penetration; yet at the same time, she could be clearly understood by the citizen on the street. Or, at the present time, the prime minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni, has excellent articulation of her policies at the same time as she captures the attention of the masses (she does not speak over their heads).

We are experiencing concern and reactions close to panic about the sudden and massive appearance of drones in night skies. Presidential and Vice-Presidential leadership in responding to these concerns with clarity, knowledge, and purpose is clearly lacking. The public press voices representing the Executive Branch are also flaccid and inadequate for the purpose of allaying public concerns. The fact that inept voices such as Karine and John are tasked with reassuring us actually increases our apprehensions.

E.Jeffrey Ludwig has taught American History and Literature, English, and Philosophy at a number of colleges and universities. He was also included four times in Who's Who Among America's High School Teachers. His latest books Liberty Manifesto, Vol. 1 and Christian Perspectives, Vol. 1 are available at amazon.

Image: AT via Magic Studio