The No-Win Situation
Today I received a newsletter in my e-mail. The author was frustrated that the Bush administration has been taking our liberties away. He is not a fan of the Patriot Act, and is also questioning language that the administration used to make it easier for the government to declare martial law.
Shortly after I read this newsletter, I watched Rosie O'Donnell spar with Dennis Miller regarding the Patriot Act. Miller had no problem with the administration listening to phone calls from the US to the Middle East. Rosie chimed in that the administration wouldn't stop there, and that was the problem with the Patriot Act.
Let's revisit how the liberals and their allies in the media, which is essentially every news outlet except for Fox News and AM radio, created their own mass hysteria surrounding the major events of the Bush administration. It didn't take the liberals long after 9/11 to begin to place the blame right at Bush's doorstep. 'What did he know and when did he know it?' 'This happened on his watch'. 'He was on vacation while terrorists plotted to kill 3000 Americans'. (He was also governor of Texas while terrorists plotted 9/11) 'George Bush didn't do anything to stop 9/11'. We all remember the hysteria that continues to this day.
Now let's also revisit the hysteria after Katrina. 'Bush doesn't care about black people'. 'We can spend billions of dollars in Iraq while our American citizens wait to be rescued.' The libs and the media were only too happy to let Bush take the fall for the Katrina response. Anyone who has looked beyond the media hysteria knows that Nagin asked for the feds to take over the rescue operation, but that Blanco denied that request. Anyone who is being intellectually honest knows that for Bush to have the feds take over would have created an uproar about him being a dictator and trampling on the rights of the state of Louisiana and Governor Blanco. The federal government does not have the right to just go in and take over; there are checks and balances to keep the federal government out of local government. But neither Nagin nor Blanco took the fall for the inept Katrina response; Bush did.
The libs made it very clear that they were unhappy with these two disastrous situations and for Bush's perceived role in them. In response, Bush created the Patriot Act, giving the feds much more freedom to spy on our enemies. He is now also making it easier for the president to use the military as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, disease outbreak, terrorist attack or to any “other condition.” I see these actions as a direct response to the criticism that has been leveled against him.
But the libs don't see it that way. They refuse to see the role they played in this. Now their criticism is that Bush is a dictator who is trampling on our civil liberties. What would they have Bush do? How do they think the federal government gets intelligence in the first place? They're mad because Bush didn't interpret an old, vague piece of intelligence to mean that hijacked planes would slam into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. How do they think we got that intelligence in the first place? By respecting everyone's civil liberties? What do they propose our government do to prevent another 9/11? Out of one side of their mouth they're angry that 9/11 happened, and out of the other side of their mouth they're angry over every single method we might use to prevent another one. What do they want? Should we have a coffee talk with our enemies and sing "Kum Bayah"?
It's the same with Katrina. Had Bush allowed the feds to take over the rescue, the libs would have screamed that he's a dictator. The very ineptitude of the local response made the libs scream for a federal response, and Bush has now seen to it that he or any future president can more easily intervene. The way I see it, the libs got exactly what they asked for.
Shortly after I read this newsletter, I watched Rosie O'Donnell spar with Dennis Miller regarding the Patriot Act. Miller had no problem with the administration listening to phone calls from the US to the Middle East. Rosie chimed in that the administration wouldn't stop there, and that was the problem with the Patriot Act.
Let's revisit how the liberals and their allies in the media, which is essentially every news outlet except for Fox News and AM radio, created their own mass hysteria surrounding the major events of the Bush administration. It didn't take the liberals long after 9/11 to begin to place the blame right at Bush's doorstep. 'What did he know and when did he know it?' 'This happened on his watch'. 'He was on vacation while terrorists plotted to kill 3000 Americans'. (He was also governor of Texas while terrorists plotted 9/11) 'George Bush didn't do anything to stop 9/11'. We all remember the hysteria that continues to this day.
Now let's also revisit the hysteria after Katrina. 'Bush doesn't care about black people'. 'We can spend billions of dollars in Iraq while our American citizens wait to be rescued.' The libs and the media were only too happy to let Bush take the fall for the Katrina response. Anyone who has looked beyond the media hysteria knows that Nagin asked for the feds to take over the rescue operation, but that Blanco denied that request. Anyone who is being intellectually honest knows that for Bush to have the feds take over would have created an uproar about him being a dictator and trampling on the rights of the state of Louisiana and Governor Blanco. The federal government does not have the right to just go in and take over; there are checks and balances to keep the federal government out of local government. But neither Nagin nor Blanco took the fall for the inept Katrina response; Bush did.
The libs made it very clear that they were unhappy with these two disastrous situations and for Bush's perceived role in them. In response, Bush created the Patriot Act, giving the feds much more freedom to spy on our enemies. He is now also making it easier for the president to use the military as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, disease outbreak, terrorist attack or to any “other condition.” I see these actions as a direct response to the criticism that has been leveled against him.
But the libs don't see it that way. They refuse to see the role they played in this. Now their criticism is that Bush is a dictator who is trampling on our civil liberties. What would they have Bush do? How do they think the federal government gets intelligence in the first place? They're mad because Bush didn't interpret an old, vague piece of intelligence to mean that hijacked planes would slam into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. How do they think we got that intelligence in the first place? By respecting everyone's civil liberties? What do they propose our government do to prevent another 9/11? Out of one side of their mouth they're angry that 9/11 happened, and out of the other side of their mouth they're angry over every single method we might use to prevent another one. What do they want? Should we have a coffee talk with our enemies and sing "Kum Bayah"?
It's the same with Katrina. Had Bush allowed the feds to take over the rescue, the libs would have screamed that he's a dictator. The very ineptitude of the local response made the libs scream for a federal response, and Bush has now seen to it that he or any future president can more easily intervene. The way I see it, the libs got exactly what they asked for.
posted by PJ at
1:36 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home