Bowing To The King Of Partisanship
After bowing like a subservient slave before the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, President Barack Hussein Obama is now bowing to the real king of his administration. Good old fashioned American partisan politics.
It has got to be tough for this accomplished campaigner to actually have nothing left to campaign for. He is like a fish out of water. Oh sure, he’s the President of the United States. But doing the job isn’t anywhere near as much fun as running for it. It is far easier and more politically expedient for this thoughtful self-biographer to lay the groundwork for the upcoming midterm election and then his reelection campaign of new promises than it is to make the hard choices of the chief executive and stand on the principles he has already explained.
Last week this president of hope and change bowed down to the internal pressures within the Democrat Party and abandoned his previous position that no prosecutions would take place regarding the interrogation techniques used to garner information after 9-11. His new and anything but improved position is that his liberal political hack Attorney General Eric Holder will make the decision as to prosecutions. Holder who lobbied for forgiveness of murderers from the FALN has already discussed his willingness to prosecute the dastardly interrogators from the Bush era.
Only two days before this new position was announced, the president’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was on ABC’s Sunday morning show “This Week” with ex-Clinton communication director George Stephanopoulos. He said of the president “”He believes that people in good faith were operating with the guidance they were provided. They shouldn’t be prosecuted. … It’s time for reflection. It’s not a time to use our energy in looking back in any sense of anger and retribution.”
Not a time for retribution? Guess again Rahm!!! Retribution is all the Democrats have to run on.
They certainly don’t want the American people to look at who was holding the national checkbook and formulating the national budget for the two years prior to the current recession. They don’t want even the possibility that someone might ask how we let Fannie May and Freddie Mac get into a position to collapse the entire global economy without any oversight. And they really don’t want anybody to question the trillions of dollar in new spending that is and will continue to have absolutely no effect on stimulating the economy. Hammering away at the Bush administration is the only answer for keeping the national attention deflected enough to stay in power.
But at what cost?
It was the rather innocuous act on the part of the Clinton administration of installing the wall of silence between intelligence agencies that allowed the covert terrorist cells to formulate a plan, learn to fly jetliners without the need to learn how to land them and carry out test runs that led to that fateful morning in September 2001.
This chillingly vengeful political maneuver on the part of the Obama administration will have equally disastrous consequences for the future of intelligence gathering and terrorist interrogation. Is waterboarding an extreme measure? Yes it is. Is it as extreme as flying planeloads of people into crowded office buildings and government offices? I’m voting no on that one.
No one will need to ask how we allowed another brutal, murderous attack to take place. We will only need to look at the interrogation records to find that the attorneys for the terrorists we had in custody counseled their clients to plead the 5th Amendment when it came to discussing future plans of attack on America.
I am certain that the Democrats will be all too eager to blame long held resentments that the misunderstood terrorists had against the Bush administration as the reason for the successful assault. But the real reason will be that the interrogators hands will have been tied tighter than those of the terrorist being questioned.
It’s really easy to connect the dots on the how and why this change in presidential opinion is taking place. It’s also pretty easy to see where the last dot of this timeline is located.
Would this president and the Democrat Party pursue prosecution of interrogators at the expense of national security?
Insert your answer here. I know mine.
