Obama--another reason to distrust him

You’ve probably heard by now the “oops” incident with Obama and the Russian puppet (er . . . President) Medvedev during a chat at the nuclear summit in South Korea. In a discussion about missile defenses, Mr. Obama was overheard telling the Russian that "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." Mr. Medvedev, who will soon turn over the presidency to Vladimir Putin, replied that "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

This is a chilling exchange for a couple of reasons. First of all, one of the big issues of this election will be what Mr. Obama might do in a second term once he is unchecked by any future electoral constraints. Would he unleash the EPA and other regulators that he has restrained somewhat (the ozone rule) this past year before an election campaign? Would he use his executive powers to further empower labor unions? Would he continue to pursue people of faith who don’t want to support abortion and contraception on demand?

A bigger reason we should all be worried about this exchange has to do with national security, where Congress has far less power to limit Presidential policies. A bit of background, thanks to the Wall Street Journal, is useful here. Putin wants to limit or kill U.S. missile defenses in Europe and elsewhere. Obama hasn't dared to cut such an arms control deal in his first term, but what about in a second? He has made clear his stance in previous comments. For example, in 2001, he told a Chicago TV station that "I don't agree with a missile defense system."

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama insisted his private exchange with Mr. Medvedev was "not a matter of hiding the ball" until a second term. But for those of us who have been repeatedly confronted with a man who is far more leftist than we imagined, this looks like another attempt to transform America. He won’t quit until we are another Europe—heavily in debt and unarmed.