John McCormack at the Weekly Standard posted a commentary today about dissent. Mr. McCormack points out:
"John Brennan took to the USA Today to state that "Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.""
The article lists the times the members of the current administration charged the Bush Administration with doing exactly this (and there are no actual incidents of that happening).
"..."If any Member of this Senate--Democrat or Republican--takes to the floor, questions this White House policy, raises any questions about the gathering of intelligence information, or the use of it, be prepared for the worst. This White House is going to turn on you and attack you. They are going to question your patriotism." - Senator Durbin, 149 Cong. Rec. S9668, July 22, 2003."
There are other examples of similar statements listed in the article. Please read them. In light of Mr. Brennan's comments, they are quite entertaining.
The article concludes:
"Honest question: We've heard much about how the Bush administration supposedly questioned the patriotism of Democrats, but what are the specific examples? Anything on par with Brennan's accusation that critics are serving "the goals of al Qaeda"? I honestly can't recall an example of a Bush national security official questioning the patriotism of Democrats, but if someone can prove otherwise, I'd be happy to set the record straight."
I really think that the basic problem of the Obama Adminstration is that President Obama is a product of the Chicago politics that put him in the White House. He is not used to being challenged in the arena of ideas. The concept that he might have wrongly handled a situation is a foreign concept. According to the 'Chicago Way', the power of the office and the people he is connected with should be able to make dissent nonexistent. I think the fact that he is having trouble grasping this concept may have a lot to do with his sagging approval ratings.
Leave a comment