Recent revelations about the NSA spying on American citizens have caused profound disillusionment within the liberal establishment. Nothing demonstrates this quite like the Huffington Post, the generally recognized portal of liberal politics online, posting on its front page a morphed image of George W. Bush and Barack Obama – complete with the damning caption “George W. Obama.”
Hell, listening to some liberals bemoaning these revelations (about data mining phone records though not wiretapping any phone calls), you’d think they were bemoaning a betrayal worse than adultery. Except for those, like Reverend Al Sharpton, who sounded more like battered wives determined to hold onto their abusive husbands. (Although hurt, Sharpton claims he still trusts Obama.)
Not to mention those, like Morning Joe’s Mika Brzezinski, who are being forced to issue public apologies for hailing Obama’s deployment of the very war-on-terror tactics they condemned Bush for deploying. (There’s something admirable about hypocrites admitting they are hypocrites…no?)
But, frankly, I pity their bleeding hearts. Because this isn’t a case of Obama betraying his liberal base; it’s a case of his liberal base throwing a hissy fit over Obama acting like the pragmatic president he always intended to be.
I have been an ardent and unwavering Obama supporter ever since I endorsed his candidacy in It’s TIME, Run Obama Run. It was published on October 24, 2006, when many of the liberals now affecting betrayal were championing the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Perhaps this explains why, unlike them, I have no qualms about Obama not just adopting, but expanding the NSA spying techniques Bush implemented to keep America safe. In fact, my only criticism in this respect has been over Obama’s refusal to acknowledge his indebtedness to Bush.
Here, for example, is an except from one of the many commentaries in which I not only presaged these NSA revelations, but also chastised Obama for not being more forthcoming about them.
Liberals are simmering with disillusionment over the fact that Obama has been systematically adopting many of Bush’s war-on-terror tactics, which they, and he, routinely condemned during last year’s presidential campaign…
But I agree wholeheartedly with all of his flip-flops in this respect. Indeed … it is politically naïve and hypocritical to ridicule former VP Dick Cheney’s dire warnings about canceling Bush’s war-on-terror policies. (If Obama did and we were hit, it would doom his presidency).
I just wish Obama would stop using Clintonian spin to explain his adoption of these policies. After all, there is no difference between what he’s arguing today and what Bush argued throughout his presidency….
(“Obama Angers Liberals by Governing Just Like Bush,” The iPINIONS Journal, May 14, 2009)
Ultimately, whatever one thought of the Bush Administration (and as one who opposed his invasion of Iraq, I didn’t think much), there’s no denying that, post 9/11, he performed his most important job as president exceptionally well: he kept America safe.
Which is why the only way for Obama to answer his liberal critics, and at the same time assure the public that what he’s doing is right, is to challenge the American people to ask not what the NSA is doing, but ask what they would be saying the NSA failed to do if there were another 9/11.
For, if Obama canceled these spying programs and terrorists pulled off another coordinated attack, the very people criticizing him today would be the ones criticizing him for failing to tap into and foil their plans.
Apropos of which, in congressional testimony yesterday, the NSA documented 50 terrorist plots its programs foiled. It clearly hopes this documentation will quell the media-fueled hysteria that is sweeping the country. Unfortunately, in doing so, the NSA was forced to reveal far too much about its techniques and methods. Meanwhile, the irony is completely lost on its critics that their unwarranted criticisms may have fatally undermined these programs….
Related commentaries:
Obama angers liberals…
NSA Spying…