In the Bush/Cheney era, we know officials read from a far different script. Incidents like these became opportunities to exploit. Top officials -- Bush, Cheney, Rice, Ashcroft, Ridge -- would fan out and start hitting the talking points. There'd be talk about invading Yemen. Maybe the Bush gang would get a bump in the polls, maybe Dems and administration critics would hold their fire for a few days. If they didn't, the White House could take comfort in knowing that critics would be accused of "aiding and abetting" terrorists by attacking the Commander in Chief in the wake of a crisis.He has a valid point: Bush would have called a press conference yesterday. Cheney would have made his remarks from his bunker. Skeletor would have been on the Sunday shows along with Mukasey and Condi. We would be hearing how only luck saved us, and that Bush would be expecting Democrats to sign off on a raft of strict new airport security procedures. The Village would be told to measure the support for hitting Yemen. Cheney especially would be arguing for another invasion, calling it an act of war and that Yemen would soon be getting the Iraq treatment.
Obama and his team obviously prefer a far more mature, strategic approach. It's about projecting a sense of calm and control. It's about choosing not to elevate some lunatic thug who set himself on fire.
Indeed, notice the pattern throughout the year. The Obama administration has taken out Saleh al-Somali, Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, and Baitullah Mehsud, while taking suspected terrorists Najibullah Zazi, Talib Islam, and Hosam Maher Husein Smadi into custody before they could launch potential attacks.
In each case, there were no high-profile press conferences, no public chest-thumping, no desire to politicize the counter-terrorism successes. Indeed, most of the country probably never heard a word about any of these developments.
It's about competent and effective leadership, and it's what the country was sorely lacking up until 11 months ago.
Cheney will still be arguing for that. Except now the world can safely ignore him, especially since 7 years of "making us safer" still wasn't able to stop this guy. What credibility would he have in a just, sane America?
Why, none, as it should be. The adults are in charge now.
[UPDATE 11:37 AM] What Betty Cracker said. And also, Rep. Pete Hoekstra can basically go screw himself.
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday that it is "fair" to hold the Obama administration responsible for the a failure to detect an attempted terror attack. Friday, Hoekstra told the Detroit Free Press that the Obama administration needed to "connect the dots."The same people who said "It's not fair to hold Bush responsible for every single thing" wrong with America after seven years since the last shoe bomber attacked an airline are of course the ones who say it's perfectly reasonable to hold Obama accountable after 11 months.
"You were quoted in the Detroit Free Press this morning as saying that, you know, the key is to connect the dots and maybe the Obama administration will now realize that. Is it really fair to hold the Obama administration responsible here?" asked Wallace.
"Yeah, I think it really is," replied Hoekstra. "Connecting the dots here is not really on this particular case. It's connecting the dots that we've seen over the last 11 months, over the last eight years."
No comments:
Post a Comment