Dec 27 2009
Liberals are calling Obama’s apparent indifference over a terrorist’s attempt to bring down an American plane as the actions of ‘an adult in the White House.’
There is a reason why Obama hasn’t given a public statement. It’s strategy. (As in we mustn’t rush to judgement on the Fort Hood Muslim terrorist strategy?)
Today, as the nation’s law enforcement agencies respond to an attempted terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as the cable news channels and news websites pull in reinforcements to cover the incident from all angles, President Obama has been silent.
In fact, he’s been golfing. He received a counterterrorism briefing early this morning, Hawaii time, and moments later, left for the gym. The president’s vacation activities might have become the subject of a fierce partisan fight — but really, the only carping is coming from the usual suspects on the right.
Here’s the theory: a two-bit mook is sent by Al Qaeda to do a dastardly deed. He winds up neutering himself. Literally.
Authorities respond appropriately; the president presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his secretary of Homeland Security. (No he isn’t, he’s playing golf undisturbed by the averted tragedy)
But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. (And heaven knows he doesn’t want to offend his fellow Muslims by calling attention to the Muslim terrorist)
Obama of course will say something at some point. (Something like profiling is still a bad idea?) Had the terrorist blown up the plane, it;s safe to assume that Obama would no longer be in Hawaii. (No it isn’t. I doubt he’d leave his vacation for any reason) In either case, the public will need presidential fortification at some point. But Obama is willing to risk the accusation that he is “soft” on terrorism or is hovering above it all, or is just not to be bothered in order to advance what he believes is the proper collective response to a failed act of terrorism. (Everyone knows he’s soft on terrorism, especially the terrorists, that’s why there have been more terrorist-related incidents in the U.S. in 2009 than in any year since 2001)
Let the authorities do their work. Don’t presume;(Ah yes, the old ‘Don’t rush to judgement’ theme) don’t panic the country; don’t chest-thump, prejudge, interfere, politicize (in an international sense), don’t give Al Qaeda (or whomever) a symbolic victory; resist the urge to open the old playbook and run a familiar play. (That’s right, confirm the terrorists’ belief that there’s a pantywaist in the White House now who doesn’t want to offend Muslims)
In a sense, he is projecting his calm on the American people, just as his advisers are convinced that the Bush administration projected their panic and anger on the self-same public eight years ago. (No he is not, he is creating panic in Americans who realize that the head of state has no interest in protecting them)
It’s a tough and novel approach — and not at all (as they say in Britain) party political — because the standard political script would have the president and his attorney general appearing everywhere as soon as possible.
(Obama doesn’t do tough. He doesn’t appear in public without a teleprompter and can’t bring himself to accuse a Muslim terrorist of terrorism. How much more emboldening to terrorists does an America President have to be? Fricken liberals, I hope the terrorists drop bombs on their heads. This country is in grave danger because there is a traitor in charge.)