Op Ed Byte: June 15, 2014: When a scandal
breaks, Obama learns about it from the news (probably Fox News) and
gets “mad as hell.” Someone over there in that government thingie has
done something bad, and our hero will not rest until something is done
about it. OK, but what will be done about it? Since Obama is the
executive officer of that government thingie, didn’t he know anything
about these matters before he saw it on the news?
What will the scandal be next week that the president will know nothing about? Don’t ask, don’t tell, we don’t want to know. Who
has created some of the worst foreign policy disasters in modern
memory? Must have been Bush. You know, it takes a long time to correct
mistakes that people made in the past, especially when the current
president makes the same mistakes and then doubles down by adding a lot
of incompetence into the mix.
Imagine that 10
years from now a Republican president was still blaming Obama for all
his mistakes. Would the Obama sycophants still be saying, “Yup, it
takes a long time to clean up the messes left by a previous president?”
Would the national media still be in total agreement or entirely
silent on the matter?
When the next Republican
president blames Obama for everything, their strategy will not be:
Don’t ask, don’t tell, we don’t want to know.
When
we see a man refusing to acknowledge his wife’s cheating, we don’t
know whether to feel sympathy for him, be disgusted with him or to hit
him over the head with more evidence.
Many of
us are beginning to feel the same way when we see defenses of the
current president. Should we feel sympathy for the sycophants, turn
away in disgust, give them more evidence or just politely retreat back
far enough so that the embarrassment that is clearly evident is not
overwhelming for everyone present? [SOURCE: Dennis Clayson: Waterloo
Cedar Falls Courier: The media, sycophants and Obama]