Your Enemies Closer?
By: David Tatosian
Given the state of our domestic politics, it might behoove all of us to remember this truism: keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
The Democrats, whom we will call our enemies for the sake of this argument, consider the sum of all evil to be American Citizens who stubbornly cling to an increasingly irrelevant constitution, and who demand accountability and legislation based on reasoned discourse and the study of facts.
Typically, Democratic response to those demands result in our being buried under a mountain of egalitarian mandates that would make Lenin runny with envy.
In matters of national security, the Democrats are at a fundamental loss. The idea of defending the very thing they despise, the American Citizen, compels an almost instinctual revulsion that more often than not results in hysterical accusations of Islamophobia and strident demands for tighter gun control laws.
They havenâ€™t a clue.
That these same democrats, who rode the crest of the anti-war/anti-America hysteria of the 60â€™s and 70â€™s into cultural dominance, chose to run a confessed war criminal in the last presidential election indicates a profound lack of even marginal human morality.
However, it is worth remembering that 48% of the American people voted the Democratic ticket in that election.
Dishonesty, self-hatred and self-deception of that magnitude cannot be so easily dismissed, the derision of Rove and Bush notwithstanding.
If we grant the Republicans the honor of being our friends in the above truism, we are forced to admit that they have been no less destructive and indifferent to our demands, no less destructive in intent or execution.
For example: In the aftermath of 9/11 Mr. Bush boldly proclaimed those responsible would be brought to justice, but he couldnâ€™t bring himself to apply any aspect of that bold proclamation to the Saudis, whose citizens were overwhelmingly represented in the contingent responsible for the deaths of 3,000 Americans.
Nor could he force himself to terminate the State Departmentâ€™s irresponsible and dangerous Visa Express program that provided unfettered access to the American heartland for Saudi residents.
Within the context of that bold commitment, one could have reasonably expected Mr. Bush to marshal the considerable resources and manpower at his disposal to secure our borders, ports of entry and airports. After all, we had suffered a devastating attack with, as far as we knew, more to follow.
Alas, Mr. Bushâ€™s response was the tried and true response of bureaucrats everywhere: create an even bigger and more inefficient department that will do even less.
Hence, we have Mr. Bushâ€™s Department of Homeland Security.
That departmentâ€™s inability and unwillingness to perform part of its mission by securing our borders was exposed by 900 American Citizens last April.
Even today, while the Customs and Border Patrol â€œreaches outâ€ to the private sector for help with its new and improved Secure Border Initiative, Mr. Bush remains vehemently opposed to any border security whatsoever.
Thanks to Mr. Bush, the CBP has admitted it cannot do the job for which it was created.
We owe Mr. Bush a debt of gratitude for his unwavering support of the Dubai ports deal too.
His treason and dhimmitude aside, the focus on our lack of container and port security should enable us to institute procedures that will help keep us safe, rather than help his Muslim bosses make money off our potential demise.
Perhaps the â€œKeep your friends close, your enemies closerâ€ saying is misapplied.
Mr. Bush will lay claim to the fact that weâ€™ve not been attacked since 9/11.
Unfortunately we will be attacked, and it will be a direct result of Mr. Bushâ€™s actions.
There are (at least) two ways that this can occur.
The first possibility will be at the merciful conclusion of his disastrous tenure in the white house.
His successor will have the option of continuing Bushâ€™s policies of bribery and payoffs to the same Muslim thugs who have brought the EU to its knees.
Should the payoffs continue we will be safe. For a time.
Should his successor express no interest in dhimmitude, we will be attacked.
Either way, Mr. Bush and his Republicans can, and no doubt will, claim he kept America safe.
The second, and more likely eventuality is far more ugly.
It would involve an attack as a result of any impeachment proceedings.
Iâ€™m not the first to point this out, but when the Republicans are swept from office by an outraged and betrayed populace, impeachment becomes an almost certainty.
Mr. Bush is a petty, vindictive and stupid man. In essence, he is an indifferent potentate, similar to his Muslim friends, in manner and attitude.
He would not take kindly to those proceedings.
His response would be suitably dangerous and unreasoned.
Whatever his response might entail, one of the results is sure be dead Americans.
Well, I suppose thatâ€™s one campaign issue the Republicans can run on this year.