The U.S. should prohibit perpetrators and supporters of Islamist brutality from entering the country while embracing advocates for religious freedom. End of story.
Belonging to the Gang of Eight carries massive responsibility in representing all 435 members of the legislature in very sensitive national security exercises.
Decisions concerning covert actions are not often easily reached.
Nobody walks away with everything they want in politics.
While the primary focus continues to be on religious minorities - the Christian religious minorities and the Jewish community - ISIS will also go after people who interpret and believe the Muslim faith differently than they do.
America is the freest country on the planet, but for Snowden, this isn't enough. He is a state diplomat in Snowden land.
I served 10 years on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, and I had the distinct privilege of meeting with real U.S. spies throughout the globe.
The silence caused by politicizing speech is deafening.
The answer as to why ISIS gained power and influence, and why stability in the Middle East has disastrously deteriorated, does not require extensive analysis.
The Obama-Clinton administration gambled with America's national security by embracing radical jihadists, and the world lost.
Libya stood as a source of stability in volatile northern Africa in 2011. The administration turned it into a failed state that exposed southern Europe to refugees and terrorist elements, all of which Gadhafi had warned about.
The forces that rescued Americans on Sept. 11, 2012, were not the U.S. military. They were not the militias that overthrew Gadhafi. They were Gadhafi devotees who were loyal to him and to the U.S. government with whom their leader reached a 'deal.'
Asking presidential candidates whether they support or would change past foreign policy decisions is the most common line of questioning among members of the media. It's also the most pointless.
Should President Clinton have killed Osama bin Laden when he had the opportunity in 1990s? Should President Bush have sent the U.S. military into Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein in 2003? Should President Obama have withdrawn all troops from Iraq in 2011? Such questions provide no real insight into future considerations.
The media should probe and challenge candidates to help voters understand their views on foreign policy. Questions should include, 'What lessons have you learned from past foreign policy decisions? How will they shape your vision as commander in chief? What is America's role in the world?'
No president can amend the past, and the public is tired of candidates who simply point fingers instead of offering their own solutions. They want a leader who will describe the threats as they are and rally the country behind a strategy to defeat them.
Ensuring that the intelligence community adheres to its responsibilities to report on its activities to Congress is absolutely essential.
From my experience as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, if a congressperson is identified as a potential target by a foreign intelligence service, that individual is notified.
When I came to Congress in 1993, the traditional idea that all politics stopped at the water's edge was alive and well. Americans had been unified for the previous four decades against the threat from the former Soviet Union and communism.
I will never forget standing with fellow members of Congress on the steps of the Capitol to sing 'God Bless America' on the night of 9/11.
