Jun 29 2006

WaPo Publishes A Liberal Fantasy Story

Published by at 11:52 pm under All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT

Boy, Oh Boy. Something must be in the water in DC because the place is LOSING ITS MIND! In my 46 years living in the DC area I have never seen it this bad with the pols so out of touch that no one would be surprised if they all worked for MIB. Today the Washington Post publishes what can only be called a liberal fairy tale as the Post takes a fairly obvious (and expected) ruling from the US SC and pretends that George Bush has lost all his Presidential and Commander-In-Chief powers:

For five years, President Bush waged war as he saw fit. If intelligence officers needed to eavesdrop on overseas telephone calls [with known terrorists] without warrants, he authorized it. If the military wanted to hold terrorism suspects [caught on the field of battle] without trial, he let them.

Now the Supreme Court has struck at the core of his presidency and dismissed the notion that the president alone can determine how to defend the country.

OMG, I have never seen such pathetic projection of someone’s most deepest held wishes splashed on a fairly expected US SC decision. Before we have fun with this obvious liberal wet-dream posing as news, I should address the decision in a more serious manner than I did before.

The decision basically said to get Congress to authorize the plan for dealing with trials of GITMO detainees. It did not say bring these murderers into the US Federal Court system. It did not say free them to kill again. And by setting the bar for our behavior to meet the Geneva conventions – while AQ flouts such standards of conduct – we are only being asked to make clear the distinction between the West and the Islamo-fascists. For comparison, we would never claim we did not have to follow our laws regarding murder, drugs, etc simply because organized crime disregarded those same laws. We do not stoop to the lowest common denominator, we retain our values and principles. So while AQ may violate the conventions, we are not ready to disregard them simply to deal with AQ. This is a reminder of what we can and should be, not a weakening of our efforts. And there has never been a hard case of us violating the conventions presented.

With that said, this WaPo piece is dripping with frustrated emotions and pent up fantasies! The idea Bush cannot now be Commander-In-Chief and wage this war is laughable. In its lame attempt to find a grain of vindication, this ‘news’ article simply provides insight into the warped and pathetic thinking that permeates the left as it faces the dustbin of history. Check out this ridiculously arrogant analogy:

For many in Washington, the decision echoed not simply as matter of law but as a rebuke of a governing philosophy of a leader who at repeated turns has operated on the principle that it is better to act than to ask permission.

Emphasis mine. The ‘many’ in DC is the many liberals of the establishment elite that haunt the DC bureacracy and media here. The idea Bush has to ask their permission illustrates a self centered obsession bordering in the manic. It is truly laughable this person thinks Bush needs to get permission to do anything. He graciously looks for support, he needs none to take action if he so decides. What is pathetic is the first quote, where monitoring terrorists who are out to kill us is somehow considered a ‘bad thing’. These losers are so upset that no one listens to them that they have clasped onto this US SC decision as their vindication of a seething hate hidden for all these years.

Yeah, right. We don’t want Bush monitoring terrorists and anyone they are in contact with in the US. We don’t want the NSA to alert the FBI they have caught Al Qaeda in the ME talking to someone in the US about attacks in the US. We don’t want the FBI to go to FISA on these leads for a warrant to track an AQ agent in the US. We don’t want those responsible for planning 9-11 (e.g., Khalid Sheik Mohammed) to be held and squeezed of all potential information they may have of future 9-11′s. No, we definitely do not want that! Heaven forbid we actually tried to defend ourselves.

This truly is a piece of liberal wishful thinking and illustrates why the left is rapidly becoming a footnote in history (or should be, if the GOP could keep its act together and stop defending Congressman caught taking bribes and not leave our borders unprotected). The seething hate can be seen in the supposed glorification of Dick Durbin and his comparison of the US military to Nazis

At a political level, the decision carries immediate ramifications. It provides fodder to critics who turned Guantanamo Bay into a metaphor for an administration run amok.

Really? I thought the decision said hold the murdering bastards for as long as you wanted to. Silly me. The left is so lost and confused it would be funny if they weren’t such a danger to themselves and to the rest of us. To them Bush is a bigger danger than Al Qaeda. Some have begun to doubt 9-11 even happened. Some have claimed AQ was never a threat. All of them are out of their minds

5 responses so far

5 Responses to “WaPo Publishes A Liberal Fantasy Story”

  1. For Enforcement says:

    Yeah, I’ve read some of what I consider the pertinent parts of the SC decision and I don’t even see it as a real set back to the administration.

    First of all, it doesn’t apply to the prisoners at Gitmo, it applies to Hamdan only. It said they can let him rot in hell if they want to(they didn’t exactly phrase it that way, but the meaning was the same) All they said is, if you don’t want to try him with a civil court or court martial, you have to get congress to agree with how you want to do it.

    So far, I don’t see where the decision said anything at all about the Presidents role as Commander in Chief. The SC can’t change that anyhow, that is constitutional authority.

    Now, let’s say the President doesn’t agree with the Supreme Court and still maintains he is doing what he is doing thru his constitutional authority. If the Supreme court still doesn’t agree, what is the remedy. I guess they could ask Congress to impeach him. I would say that the Pres could just ignore them and absolutely nothing would happen.
    At any rate, your assessment that the WaPo is in fantasyland is most certainly the case.

    I watched LtCdr Charles Swift on Greta’s show, and he said the decision means Hamden gets a trial based on our rules. Everything I’ve read in other places don’t agree with that, I’m not sure who’s correct, but I suspect LtCdr Swift is not correct.

    If there is somenone that knows for sure, it would be helpful.

  2. crosspatch says:

    Having failed in their attempt to cast Iraq as Vietnam, they are now attempting to adjust the “spin”. The war on terror is now being cast as the personal war of a megalomaniacal President Bush who would use terrorism as a pretext to strip Americans of their rights and use the military as his personal six-shooter in global adventures. To the press now, America isn’t at war, President Bush is.

    It’s just the Democrats making a slight adjustment in strategy since the last direction failed. The good news is that the people don’t seem to be buying this tack either.

  3. ReidBlog says:

    The smackdown of King George…

    Call it a liberal fantasy if you want, but the Supreme Court’s legal smackdown of the Bush White House’s monarchical terror “war” was the first real hint of the return of oversight and sanity in at least some quarters of American government and jur…

  4. M. Simon says:

    AJ,

    You really need to get up to speed on the drug thing. Even the NIDA says drugs do not cause addiction. They say it is half genetics and half environmental factors (what I prefer to call trauma). My take:

    Is Addiction Real?

    The Rs are going to get gobsmacked hard by this if the Dems ever wake up.

  5. M. Simon says:

    Re: Smackdown of Georgr,

    George wanted to give the poor detainees a trial. The Supremes said the trial must accord with treaties, the UCMJ, or law.

    If Bush doesn’t like thos options he can hold them until the war is over.

    I like the second option myself.