Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Democrat Hypocrisy.

BO has broken so many promises it's hard to keep track of them all. I'm sure he can't keep track of them as well since he never intended to keep most of them in the first place. One of those promises that he's broken is the closing of Gimto with the continuing of the military tribunals. Normally I would be delighted about the president actually doing the right thing. However, two things about this broken promise should disturb us with the biggest being downright hypocrisy.During Bush's reign, the media and the left totally hammered Bush over the so-called unconstitional detaining of the enemy combatants by having them held at Gitmo. The outcry of tyranny over this was deafening by the media and the Democrats in Congress. They were seeing these detainments as violations of human rights. Like the animals being detained are being detained there are human or at least worthy of "human rights". The people, and I use that term loosely in this case, are among the worse of the worse of terrorist that were captured in the battlefield. These men would cut their own mother’s throat if it served their purpose. They would hesitate to cut your mother’s or child’s. Just ask my wife who had seen what they’re capable of twice. The left including the evil ACLU and the terrorist legal team of CAIR with the complicatedness of the media spewed propaganda of civil and humanitarian right violations over the Bush administration over this policy. As much I wasn’t a fan of Bush because he was more of leftist liberal than a conservative, this policy was the right thing for our protection and the likes of the ACLU and CAIR would rather see you dead than these evil monstrosities.

Now that BO is holding the reins and he’s decided that closing Gitmo and proceeding with the military tribunals isn’t such a bad idea, saddening the media is spinning as an act of patriotism and sound leadership. So a leftist Socialist like BO is doing the “human rights” violations saddening everything is good and right. So Bush was evil and wrong while BO is righteous and proper. This reeks of so much hypocrisy that it should make a reasonable person disgusted. This is the case of what goes on in backward Islamic countries. They mainly fight for which thug is in power and will try their enemies for doing the exact same thing they’re doing. Since it’s their guy that does it, it’s right. When the other guy does it, it’s blasphemy. I thought we in the US were beyond such petty and stupid dichotomy. I guess I was mistaken. Had the left and the media admitted they made a mistake or was using the Gitmo football for political reason, I could have respected them for coming clean about it. Instead, we get the same lame brine that comes from the left.

The second thing that should disturb us was the one part of the policy of the Bush administration that I completely didn’t agree with: the detainment without cause. Under the policy, which was started by FDR during World War II, were the presidential powers to hold, detain without charges, assert military tribunals, and the execution of enemy combatants. An enemy combatant was a term drawn up during the Geneva Convention to define a terrorist. So having the war of terror, oh, pardon, oversea contingency operations, being too vague in the first place. During World War II we knew who our enemies were and once caught committing acts out of uniform they fit this definition of enemy combatant. The same was done during the occupation of German against the Wolf packs of saboteurs and terrorist that still supported the defeated Nazi’s. However, with this vague war on terror during the Bush’s administration, anyone that was viewed as a potential terrorist was classified as an enemy combatant. Under FDR someone must had committed or attempted an act that was defined as being fighting out of uniformed to commit terrorist acts. There was clear definition of what an enemy combatant was. Under Bush’s doctorate, anyone could be defined as a “potential” terrorist simply because the government doesn’t like them. Other than those out of uniform committing acts of terrorism, there were no clear guidelines. Given the now repealed memo of those potential right wing terrorist, this administration could easily decide those that don’t tote the party line, are in the military, protect us from those the government send loose on the population as potential terrorist. Heck, they view anyone that part of a 3rd party (which I’ve voted for in the past because of my dissatisfaction of the two party system) is a radical and potential terrorist. Those of us in 3rd parties are tired the same ole, same ole. We want reform to have our republic response to represent those that sent them, not to special interests and having it in reverse. This administration has shown that it views anyone with opposing views of the status quo as being dangerous even though nobody because they were a 3rd party support ever advocated acts of violence.

Given this party’s paranoia about their opposition and their lust for power, this power had the potential for great abuse and was why I was never a supporter. Now that the hypocrites have control of it makes me more fearful for the future of this country. Worse yet, many of the voters, hypocrites themselves it seems by the lack of accountability and outrage of this flip flop, are looking to be all to willing to let us slip down this slope. Just as long it’s their guy that’s doing it. Seems the terrorist have won. We’re starting to think and behave just like them just as long as we have our thug running things.

No comments: