Hillary's job just got much harder.   The WikiLeaks dump has reduced the flow of diplomatic discourse to a trickle.  Damage control is the current priority, and the barrage of embarrassing revelations seems likely to continue.  The inevitable plea to "review security procedures" has been made, and the obligatory call to "bring Assange to justice" has been issued.

While gravely detrimental to America and her interests, it is also a golden opportunity for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to make the transition from State Department to exploratory committee.  Here's how she makes opportunity from this crisis:

While true that this WikiLeaks debacle is potent and far-reaching, even the most fantastic news story eventually fades from the front page.  Meanwhile, Madame Secretary will have ample camera time to look presidential.  The Obama administration, conversely, will try to shield the President from Assange's outrage.  As a result, in the coming weeks, Hillary will have a chance to resign somewhat gracefully while leaving President Obama with an ugly diplomatic mess for bonus points.  Would she do it?

Why not?  The public would not focus blame on Clinton for one important reason.  Julian Assange.  Assange gives Secretary Clinton a bogeyman to point to.  After all, she did all she could.  She said all the right things.  Foreign leaders would likely praise her brand of negotiating, effectively endorsing her probable candidacy.  To top it off, she would likely have amassed a compendium of unflattering diplomatic anecdotes relating to President Obama.  That would be some industrial grade campaign ammunition, if there's enough of it.

President Obama would then be left with the task of quickly filling this vital vacancy.  With his approval ratings in the toilet, any choice would face intense scrutiny.  Not exactly what a first-term President needs with the 2012 campaigns looming.  His weakness is showing publicly as well, as polls are showing the President in a virtual tie with some presumptive republican candidates.

WikiLeaks aside, President Obama was dealt a serious political blow on November 2nd, and will likely be bloodied by an investigation-prone House Of Representatives.  Even the progressive financier George Soros recently said, "...if this president can’t do what we need, it is time to start looking somewhere else.”  That statement reverberated far and wide through the global political spectrum.

President Obama may not be quite ready to throw in the towel, but Madame Secretary will soon be beautifully poised to deliver a knockout blow. 

 
In 15th century England, Lord Chancellor John Morton collected taxes for King Henry VII. Chancellor Morton's approach was simple.  If you were obviously wealthy, you had some extra scratch for the Crown.  If you had no outward signs of wealth, it was assumed you had squirreled away your wealth, and could afford to part with some coin of the realm. 

This dilemma is known to logicians and game theorists as Morton's Fork.  When you hear someone say, "Between a rock and a hard place," and "Between the devil and the deep blue sea," they are describing this type of situation.  When it comes airline passengers, it becomes, "Damned if i do, damned if I don't."

Here's why you're damned if you do. 

It's no secret that the TSA screeners would prefer that the flying public choose the backscatter scanners.  It saves time, keeps things moving, and is somewhat similar to procedures already in place.  What the TSA is learning, however, is that the scanners pose an affront our sense of modesty and privacy, literally stripping us naked.

If that's not bad enough, there is still a debate about the safety of the specific type of ionizing radiation used in the machines.  Stories of melting DNA, an increased risk of cancer, and reduced sperm viability are steering people to the "opt out" line.

Here's why you're damned if you don't.

By opting out of the backscatter machines, Morton's Fork pokes you again.  The negative stories keep coming and coming.  Prosthetic breast is removed.  Elderly woman groped.  Man soaked with urine.  Children touched in their no-no place.  It is no wonder that more and more of the traveling public are collectively telling the TSA, "Don't touch my junk."

Worse still, its come to light that neither the backscatter machines or the enhanced patdowns are capable of detecting certain chemical weapons.  They cannot even tell if someone has a device hidden in a body cavity.  It's not pleasant to think about, but women can conceal up to 24 inches of explosive inside their nether regions...men can conceal up to 12 inches.

Ask yourself this question.  Would it surprise you if the TSA missed a bomb component hidden inside a body cavity?  If the answer is no,  the natural conclusion is that these enhanced procedures do little to enhance airline security. 

Surely the TSA knows this, so why do they continue this disastrous policy?  The fact that millions were spent by scanner lobbyists clouds the issue further, as does the CEO of a scanner company joining President Obama on his recent trip to India.

For the airlines, this extra security inevitably leads to loss of revenue.  More people will drive, and the enhanced procedures will mean more delayed and canceled flights.  Seems like a horrendous policy for an industry that has a storied history of bankruptcies and reorganization. 

Airline passengers are beginning to revolt, and small changes are likely, but the bad press will continue unless a major revamp is in the works.  This "Morton's Fork" is an affront to the privacy and modesty of airline passengers, if not their constitutional rights.