Terrorism: patriotism vs politics

Short of threatening someone, bloggers can pretty well get away with saying anything they want and criticizing anyone they want - very often in the crudest and harshest of terms. But most are pretty responsible people who do their homework, a euphemism for research, hopefully using credible resources. Reliable sources are not the home pages of political parties or organizations or even other blogs. That's how lies spread.

Politicians are so stupid that they don't realize that whatever they say or do gets recorded for virtual eternity. They don't realize that besides the presence of news sources and other documents on the Internet, there are mega data-bases that make the world wide web seem rather clunky.

In a matter of minutes information from hundreds of publications can be searched, all at the same time, going back to the early 1980s in Dialog, Lexis-Nexis and Dow Jones News Service. So, politicians need to use caution before pointing fingers, making irresponsible statements and lying. Whatever they do or say can come back to haunt them later on.

Irresponsible statements would be the criticism coming from Republican quarters about President Obama's thinking on and handling of terrorist activities. We've had a year of lies from Republican congressmen and their golden girl, Sarah Palin. Obviously, health care reform and the bailouts were wrapped in politics.

But when a tragedy or potential tragedy of horrific proportions occurs, patriotism and carefully worded pronouncements should take precedence over petty, small-minded, offensive politics. Maybe the fear of being charged with treason after 9/11 and the shoe bomber is why the Democrats kept their mouths shut and supported President Bush and Rumsfeld - spelled with a D.

The first person I would lock up and keep in shackles would be former Vice President Dick Cheney. He's such an irresponsible lose canon that maybe psychiatric care in a maximum security ward would be preferable.

Cheney told Politico, "As I've watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war."

"Flat out untrue," says Eugene Robinson.

The fact is that Obama has said many times that we are at war against terrorists. He said it as a candidate. He said it in his inaugural address: "Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred." He has said it since.

It happens that at least two men who were released from Guantanamo appear to have gone on to play major roles as al-Qaeda lieutenants in Yemen. Who let these dangerous people out of our custody? They were set free by the administration of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Here is the one that jumps out at me: The president, Cheney claims, "seems to think that if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won't be at war."

It happens that at least two men who were released from Guantanamo appear to have gone on to play major roles as al-Qaeda lieutenants in Yemen. Who let these dangerous people out of our custody? They were set free by the administration of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Politico points out that while "Cheney and other Republicans have accused Obama of a muted response to the attack, President George W. Bush was quieter for much longer about the attack by shoe bomber Richard Reid in December 2001."

After six days, when he discussed - for the first time - the incident at his Crawford, Texas ranch where he was vacationing, Bush said, "We've got to be aware that there are still enemies to the country. And our government is responding accordingly." Cheney had criticized Obama for a "low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people. . . ."

The day before, Politico reports, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had refused to comment other than to say, "That's a matter that's in the hands of the law enforcement people."

That's about all the Cheney this blogger can take, but there are other non-patriots. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich) voted against funding for the TSA but has been viciously critical of Obama's handling of the bomb threat - even using the issue in a fund-raising letter. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has also criticized the president for his reaction to the terrorist attempt. DeMint has actively campaigned against appointing a TSA head for fear that the agency would go union. Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) chimes in, accusing Obama of being too soft on terrorism. Next they'll be saying he's too soft on Communism