May 02, 2011

Progressive hypocrisy and the death of bin Laden

Piggybacking on Duffy's post below, there's much to add to the general euphoria surrounding the death of Osama bin Laden ... except for one thing: The inevitable politicking from both sides. As expected, the LGOMB (that's Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers), especially Jason "Trust Fund" Scott, are bragging that "Obama got the job done where George Bush failed." And then adding, "Suck it, GOP."

Well, it is true -- intelligence under the previous administration was indeed unable to locate and hunt down OBL, while the current one was. All Americans should applaud our current government's efforts and ultimate success in this regard. Only very hardened partisans (on the Right) are nitpicking Obama's decision, and it's coming off as petty. They ought to take a page from Sean Hannity (who happens to be on my radio at present) and laud Obama -- period.

And the very hardened partisans on the Left (like Scott and the LGOMB) ought to cease the gloating and consider the following, idiots that they are: Reports indicate that the needed intelligence to track OBL down and kill him came from enhanced interrogation methods used at ... Guantánamo Bay. Are Scott, the LGOMB, and other far-left nuts as Iowahawk describes below?

Folks like the LGOMB prattled on endlessly about George W. Bush's "war crimes" for authorizing enhanced interrogation methods used in the GWOT (General War on Terror). Yet now ... Barack Obama

  • reneges on his promise to close down Guantánamo Bay prison not only within the promised one year, but seemingly for good now,
  • reneges on his "commitment" to hold civilian trials for Gitmo detainees, and instead opts to give them military trials -- exactly what George Bush wanted to do, and for which he was criticized endlessly by the Left,
  • not only doesn't cease previous administration actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, rendition and enhanced interrogations at Gitmo and elsewhere, but even ups the ante with Predator drone strikes in central Asia.

Need it be [re]stated that Obama campaigned on just the opposite in 2007 and 2008 -- and that these very promises were a huge factor in getting him elected?

I haven't checked around a whole heck of a lot since getting home from work (work = something that "Trust Fund" Scott has never had to worry about), but the most honest -- and consistent -- far-left assessment I've seen thus far comes from "Nangelator" over Common Sense Political Thought. He writes regarding the fact that OBL's killing was made possible via interrogations at Gitmo:

This is disappointing to me. It’s finding out we won by cheating. Some of the people that would gloat over this would also gloat over a 50% discount at a shop, won by torturing the owner until he relented.

America shouldn’t win by being more evil than the enemy. Or as evil.

Certainly, I do not agree with such a sentiment, not even a little; however, Nangelator often opined quite negatively during the previous administration about the use of enhanced interrogation methods and using Gitmo as a prison in general. And now he's not happy with using these exact things to kill OBL. Like it or not, he's consistent.

Not so, the LGOMB. Their memories are about as functional as their logic and general intellect. All of those strategies that Obama maintained from the Bush administration are now conveniently forgotten, and we get posts by them like this. And gloating at conservative blogs. (Kudos to David Anderson at Delaware Politics for doing what the LGOMB does regularly at their site: severely editing "Trust Fund" Scott's comments there.)

In other words, "Torture? Say what?"

Again, congratulations to President Obama for his courageous decisions, and kudos to all the servicemen and intelligence personnel involved in the operation.

UPDATE: Group that Killed Bin Laden was Smeared (by progressives) as Dick Cheney's 'Assasination Ring.'

Posted by Hube at May 2, 2011 04:24 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

I've heard conflicting reports of Gitmo and CIA rendition centers for the source of the information that broke the case wide open. Not that which one really matters.

Posted by: Jeff the Baptist at May 2, 2011 05:01 PM

Let's see, President Bush orders the CIA and Defense Department to hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden, but they are unable to do so while he is still in office. President Obama continues the same instructions, but, 2½ years later, they succeed.

Now, how does this mean that President Bush failed while President Obama succeeded? Unless the commanders-in-chief were out tracking the target themselves, it would seem to me that neither succeeded nor failed, but that the CIA and the military finally succeeded after a long effort.

Posted by: Dana at May 2, 2011 08:20 PM

"Born-again waterboarder" - That's what my bumpersticker says!

Posted by: Billy86 at May 6, 2011 02:29 PM