Delaware Liberal

I am confused.

In an earlier Nemski thread, Donviti and Anonone were critical of President Obama’s response to the attempted Flaming Crotch terrorist attack. I have to ask, do both want Obama to be more like George W. Bush in his response to terrorism? Now, both had been attacking Obama from the left as a result of the healthcare bill not being progressive enough. Indeed, I suspect, but I am not sure, that both have also criticized Obama from the left for failing to prosecute Bush Administration officials for war crimes, for continuing military tribunals, for not ending Don’t Ask Don’t Tell immediately, etc. Now, I share their frustration on all of the latter issues, but I understand why compromises were made or actions were not yet taken. What I do not understand, is how Anonone and Donviti now appear to be supporters or the Bush-Cheney Neocon PANIC reaction to terrorism.

During the Bush years, administration officials viewed incidents like these as opportunities to exploit. Often, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Ashcroft, and Ridge would find the nearest camera and fan the flames of panic and fear. If Bush were President right now, or Palin, or McCain, or Cheney, they would all use this attempted terrorist attack as a rationale for the invasion of Yemen and perhaps, Amsterdam. It would definitely be an opportunity to panic the nation into a state of fear, for when the populace is afraid it is more controllable, a hallmark of fascism. And if anyone criticized the Administration response as “fear mongering,” they would be called traitors, or at least be accused of “aiding and abetting” terrorists by attacking the Commander in Chief in the wake of a crisis.

Now, Donviti recently traveled to Amsterdam, so perhaps he has gained some insight into the Netherland’s defenses and thinks that Obama should attack now so that our soldiers could gain access to legal hemp and prostitution, as well as their beer.

But the prevailing liberal and Democratic view, and the view of both candidate Obama and President Obama, is what Marc Ambinder described in his column published earlier today which Nemski linked to:

Authorities respond appropriately; the President (as this president is want to do) presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his Secretary of Homeland Security.

But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. […]

Let the authorities do their work. Don’t presume; don’t panic the country; don’t chest-thump, prejudge, interfere, politicize (in an international sense), don’t give Al Qaeda (or whomever) a symbolic victory; resist the urge to open the old playbook and run a familiar play.

This is what Obama’s base wanted when we voted for him, Donviti: a different approach to responding to terrorism. It is what you used to want as well, before you figured out you could be more bombastic in opposing Obama on all things rather than actually thinking about the issues. It is either that, or a clear cut example of Obama Derangement Syndrome taking hold.

In fact, this low key no panic approach to fighting terrorism is working. The Obama administration has taken out Saleh al-Somali, Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, and Baitullah Mehsud, while taking suspected terrorists Najibullah Zazi, Talib Islam, and Hosam Maher Husein Smadi into custody before they could launch potential attacks. We have no heard much about these successes, under the deliberate Obama Administration strategy of not giving airtime to terrorists and not panicking the public into a state of fear.

Now, perhaps Anonone and Donviti will correct me, and state that on this one issue, Obama is doing what he said he would do. But I sense that since Obama has disappointed Donviti and Anonone on some issues, it means Obama is wrong on all issues, and it means that we have to return to the Bush years where terrorism is concerned.

Exit mobile version