After 9/11 when almost 3,000 American civilians were killed the country wanted to fight back. Traditional “doves” and Democrats knew it would be political suicide to appear weak, or appear not want to strike back at this attack on our own soil. To protect their own political ass the Dems voted to support George Bush and his desire to root and yes kill these terrorists. Now that we have all but forgotten 9/11 and how mad our country was on that day, and in the days immediately afterward, and also because we have been kept safe, the Democrats are free to fall back into their peacenick type diatribes and doveish ways. This is because they can now politically afford to do so. I wish some of them had had the political honesty to vote against the powers they granted to the President at the time, because then they might be considered worthy of respect because of intellectual consistency. They also would have been voted out of office. This political expediency, and lack of any core held beliefs, is apparently what is currently driving Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Her recent amnesia about being briefed upwards of 30 times about enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, appears to be more of the same modus operandi of politics over country. When she had to appear tough on terror she approved those techniques; now that it is politically expedient she forgets and returns to her “I am a amnesiac dove” roots. Here is a little food for thought which I wonder if Ms. Pelosi might forget voting for, or claim she didn’t know what the resolution meant:
On September 14, 2001, the House of Representatives voted 418 to 1 and the Senate voted 98-0 for resolutions authorizing the President of the United States “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
How quickly we forget, I hope we find a cure for amnesia sooon.
I read an interesting and sensible ARTICLE about the legality of enhanced interrogation techniques, particularly waterboarding, by none other than Alan Dershowitz. The following quote particularly caught my attention:
“This brings us to waterboarding. Michael Mukasey, whose confirmation as attorney general now seems assured, is absolutely correct, as a matter of constitutional law, that the issue of “waterboarding” cannot be decided in the abstract. Under prevailing precedents–some of which I disagree with–the court must examine the nature of the governmental interest at stake, and the degree to which the government actions at issue shock the conscience, and then decide on a case-by-case basis. In several cases involving actions at least as severe as waterboarding, courts have found no violations of due process.
The members of the judiciary committee who voted against Judge Mukasey, because of his unwillingness to support an absolute prohibition on waterboarding and all other forms of torture, should be asked the direct question: Would you authorize the use of waterboarding, or other non-lethal forms of torture, if you believed that it was the only possible way of saving the lives of hundreds of Americans in a situation of the kind faced by Israeli authorities on the eve of Yom Kippur? Would you want your president to authorize extraordinary means of interrogation in such a situation? If so, what means? If not, would you be prepared to accept responsibility for the preventable deaths of hundreds of Americans? “
Are any liberals going to question Dershowtiz’ left wing credentials? Arey the going to accuse the emminent professor of being “ignorant.?”Are they going to boil down “torture” to some easy definition in their desire to “get” the Bush Administration?
Lastly, if the Democrats were voting against Mukasey during his confirmation hearings in 2007 because he refused to prohibit waterboarding, are they still going to claim they had no idea waterboarding was going on? Why the questions of Mukasey on this issue? Hmmmm….I’ll answer that: because they are quite simply politically expedient, pathological liars.
What a sad chapter in our history, and for intellectual honesty.
There is an AP article purportedly examining the annointed one’s first 100 days in office
The article was, not suprisingly, wholly positive. That is fine, although it probably should have been written as an editorial opinion piece rather than a “news” article as the tone of the article ioozes not merely positivism, but idolatry for the messiah. However, one quote particularly caught my eye, it was the quote of “expert” James Thurber. Thurber was not cited as a biased “political hack” expert, but merely an “expert on the presidency” an apolitical and benign description of him. Thurber’s quote does not need repeating just say “Barack Obama is the second coming” and that is all you need to know about what this unbiased expert said about the first 100 days of BO.
I decided to look up who Dr. James A Thurber was and his credentials to be a card carrying member of the “we are smarter than everyone else liberal intellgentsia.” Here is what I found:
“Dr. Thurber has served in government as a Legislative Assistant to the late U.S. Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (Minnesota) [Liberal Democrat] and U.S. Representative James G. O’Hara (Michigan)[Democrat]. He has been involved in congressional reorganization efforts, serving as a Senior Staff Analyst for U.S. Representative David Obey [Liberal Democrat] and the Commission on Administrative Review of the U.S. House of Representatives and for U.S. Senator Adlai Stevenson, III [Liberal Democrat]”
What do these politicians that James Thurber worked, excuse me “served” with, all have in common? Hmmm let me think. I will leave it to the reader to find the commonality of Thurber’s associations in politics.
In their written journalistic standards AP purportedlyrequires objectivity. Was the perfect objective apolitical person to comment on the Messiah’s first 100 days James A. Thurber? AP your allegedly deep commitment to objectivity is a joke. Just consign you releases to the various editorial opinon pages across the country and stop trying to be a news organization. The game is up.