Just imagine this.
What would Dems be saying if we had lost The Brooklyn Bridge to a terrorist attack?
Or had a big hole in downtown LA?
Or had a dozen 747s blown up over the Pacific?
What would the Dems be saying if word got out that we had a terrorist under arrest who knew about these attacks?
What would the Dems be saying if we learned that the Bush administration refused to waterboard him for fear of being unpopular?
The Dems would say: Impeach Bush!
They would say: Why didn't Bush defend the country!
Thankfully, Pres Bush put country first.
Thankfully, we got information that prevented terrorist attacks.
As VP Cheney said: It's in the memos that Pres BO has selectively released.
Last night, Pres BO was asked a question about waterboarding. He refused to say that he would waterboard a terrorist in order to get information.
What's going on?
Is BO naive?
Or is he just telling the base what they want to hear?
Michael Goodwin saw the press conference and posted this:
"Asked about the widespread belief by some military leaders, Dick Cheney and former heads of the CIA, that waterboarding terrorists had yielded life-saving information, the President insisted, "We could have gotten the information in other ways, ways that are consistent with our values."
How can he be certain?
He can't be, but he has nonetheless built a policy banning the practice and justifying it with his genuine belief.
This is the kind of confidence that can kill."
Let's hope that BO was just telling the base what they wanted to hear.
He did it on Iraq and then implemented the Bush-McCain policy.
Why not just tell the ACLU and MoveOn.org what they want to hear on interrogation techniques?
Nevertheless, it really worries me that we have a president who doesn't see the seriousness of this war on terror.
We say it again: This is a fairy tale and it won't have a happy ending!
Pres BO will own the next attack and it won't be pretty!
No comments:
Post a Comment