All Bush Buddies are Baddies – but not Bill Ayers
*I’ll start today with a disclaimer – I spent a lot of time in my car this AM/early PM and listened to Laura Ingraham and Rush. I apologize if you heard the news already.
One of the big stories out of Washington today is another Obama attempt at appeasement. The Obama Administration has already said they will not pursue criminal charges against the Bush Admin lawyers that wrote the memos outlining what was and what was not permissible in terms of harsh interrogation tactics of enemy combatants/terrorists during the Admin’s coordination of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. I know many out there are extremely disappointed to hear this and to them I say “Suck It”!
But, being the vacillating and pandering Obama WH that it is, they got their top minds together and came up with their newest, most favorite form of coercion – character assassination. Obama has suggested that maybe local prosecutors, in the states where these attorneys now live and practice, might want to take a look at any possible ethics violations, in case these guys are in need of disbarment. I know, I’m as puzzled by this as you are since this tactic doesn’t seem to be working on the threatened Chrysler creditors. But hey, they didn’t get where they are by giving up easy.
I hope you can tell from my tone that I think this stinks. But so does BO, so, whatever.
I do have a question, though. And I’m truly interested in thoughtful and sincere answers. Don’t get me wrong, you know where I stand and I doubt anyone can come up with something that will change my mind. I avoid writing about something when I’m “on the fence”. Lucky for you, I’m rarely on the fence. Anyway, I will try to look at any responses with a pair of non-partisan glasses on – does anyone have a pair I can borrow?
If the attorneys who drafted memos advising for or against what could, according to some, be construed as illegal, will not be prosecuted (although you know they’re still looking for a way to prosecute someone for having inappropriate thoughts – forget that they never laid a hand on anyone) but should be investigated for ethics violations, investigations which alone could ruin their careers, why does Bill Ayers, someone who essentially did the same thing, hold such a lauded position in our society, er, your society, um someone’s society?
OK, that’s it. That’s my question. I truly am curious to understand the difference. I mean, these attorneys never participated in interrogations and they did not decide policy. They just wrote down opinions based on law and precedent. Nothing even indicates that they believe or approve of what they wrote. They were jsut doing their jobs – although they were working for Bush so I think we can assume they were on his side – the side of doing anything and everything necessary to prevent another attack on Americans in America and beyond.
Should we just advise these attorneys to leave the country for awhile, go underground, what? Because eventually the tide will turn (from my keyboard to God’s ears!) and they’ll be heroes again, right? Or is this simply just a case of guilt by association – something Obama has always refused to acknowledge as a part of human nature – something conservatives must atone for everyday?
I’m just trying to gain a little insight here. The more and more I put myself out there, the more and more I come to believe there is no common ground. I will never be a Liberal and most of them will never be Conservatives. It’s like Mars vs Venus, multiplied by the national debt. But I think if I can just get a glimpse of how the Liberal mind works, I might be able to find some speck of humanity in there, something to admire or respect. Please, help me to understand.
Popularity: 2% [?]
Review this site
Do you require your family physician to be a conservative/republican?
Completely off topic – how does this apply to the article or question?
But yes, my physician is a Conservative Catholic and my daughter’s physician is a conservative-leaning Christian, although I still attend and sit in on every appointment so it doesn’t really matter. What does matter is that I changed physicians when I disagreed with his philosophy and that of his practice.
Conservative is key, Republican is inconsequential. However, Democrat is nauseating and Liberal is inexcusable.
So taking that tact if your daughter was in a serious,life- threatening accident and the only Doctor around was a Liberal you would let your daughter die? I want my Doctors to be the “best” and I’m there for their help not to discuss their political views. What difference does it make that their Christian or Conservative? Please explain. Thank you
David
I still don’t get how this relates to the article – maybe it doesn’t. But try not to jump to absurd conclusions. The question was:
“Do you require your family physician to be a conservative/republican?”
Family physician usually means the physician you see once a year for check-ups and for acute minor illnesses – not emergencies or specialties. Your “family physician”, IMO, is an extremely important choice – I was heartbroken to leave the practice we attended in Ohio when we moved to Massachusetts. This is a position of influence and it is worth the time and effort to ask them their “philosophy” on treatment. I guess I’m just lucky in that I keep finding Conservative Catholic physicians – maybe because all my friends are Conservative Catholics – at least the ones I ask for referrals to doctors. And being a Conservative Catholic doctor and being a good doctor are not mutually exclusive.
Of course in a sudden life threatening or emergency situation I would not stop to quiz the doctor on their political or religious views because of the nature of the situation and the nature of the relationship – short and sweet – unless they were suggesting something outrageous and then I would question their ethics. I cannot think of a scenario this bizarre but I feel confident I would recognize it if it happened. If you want to go further and ask if I would allow a treatment on myself or my daughter that my church or my politics says is wrong I gotta’ tell you – I cannot answer for sure because I’ve never been in this situation.
Was that the trap? That I cannot answer for sure? It’s easy to make blanket decisions when you have no ethics or morals – the decisions get more difficult the higher your standards are. But if it helps confirm your worst assumptions about me, I’d kill to save her life – sort of.
Like most liberal arguments, I don’t get it either, Mom.
Perhaps they are trying to make some distant stretch here, but it must be beyond the ability of my 127 I.Q. bitter, gun-loving, religious, racist, wrong-radio-listening, basically-good-person mind to fathom.
In any event, the article above is very good. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
I actually don’t really get where this one is going, either, I think Mom’s response was fairly reasonable.
Is the IQ supposed to impress, Patriot?
Not at all… I was just stating that I’m not all that smart compared to the intellectual left.
Obviously the government knows best… freewill, liberty, and individualism be damned.