Liberals’ Reckless Mentality: 9/11 or 7/11? At War or Not?

Sarah Palin was famously humiliated during an interview with Charlie Gibson because she supposedly didn’t know the definition of the “Bush doctrine”, even though there were at least a half dozen definitions floated about during President Bush’s term.

There will be no such confusion about the Obama doctrine, as enunciated in this speech. “We act against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people, and when there are no other governments capable of effectively addressing the threat.” That’s an interesting test. I guess I wonder how exactly we know who is covered by it.

By my reading, the elder Tsarnaev brother, in a Chechen terrorist training camp would not be covered because he had not yet murdered any Americans. Even as he walked among the happy throng at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, he would still not be covered. We had to wait until he and his little bro murdered 4 people, and injured hundreds of others. Here we see the problem with the 7/11 approach to people who are not common criminals, but rather committed warriors.

We were, and are, at war, except in the fantasyland inhabited by Barack Obama and his fellow leftists. Liberals are like children. When grown-ups like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld were there to keep us safe, they had the luxury of believing foolishness like the drivel our man-child president fed to his fellow leftists during this unfortunate “change the subject” speech.

They can dress up in goofy costumes, have sit-ins, screech about “torture” and denials of civil rights for people who like to make videos in which they saw off other people’s heads, and otherwise make horses’ hind ends of themselves; and while they may be annoying, they are not dangerous. That is not the case when they are in charge of preventing another 9/11.