You Get What You Vote For…

| Comments (0)

February 7, 2010 | Comments

A question to all who voted for this President back in November of 2008, to all who voted for a man who made it clear that he would be soft on terror, that he could seduce and pacify all who seek to kill our children and destroy our nation with nothing but his golden words (his “gift,” he calls it). So how about it? How has it worked out for you? Are you feeling all warm and fuzzy now that your kids are safe and secure within the new world this man’s “gift” has given us?

Maybe you are feeling warm and fuzzy, but I have to tell you, I’m not feeling it. One year after this man’s magnanimous coronation, it appears that those who wish to kill our children and destroy our nation have not been so pacified, so seduced. Indeed we have been repeatedly attacked by terrorists on our own soil since this President was sworn in back in January, 2009. As we all know, this hit a crescendo on Christmas Day when the so-called “underwear bomber” made his attempt to bring down a plane over Detroit. Fortunately, his fellow passengers embodied more courage than what we find in our current administration, and they refused physically to permit this man’s success.

Not to be overshadowed or influenced by that courage, the administration stayed its course. The “alleged” terrorist was interrogated for a mere 50 minutes, and then, ostensibly by order of Attorney General, Eric Holder, the suspect was read his rights as though he were an American citizen. (Just a note here: Contrary to what the White House and Holder may claim, no one in this or any administration takes such drastic action without approval from the President, whether we speak of reading a terrorist his rights or trying terrorists in civil court on American soil.)

Whatever the “alleged” terrorist said during those 50 minutes caused the leaders of the United Kingdom to place their country on high alert. What did we do? We made sure the “alleged” terrorist got properly lawyered-up.

This was only the beginning of the terror landscape we face for 2010, for last week, as part of an annual briefing on the threats to our national security, Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), asked Dennis C. Blair, retired Admiral and Director of National Intelligence:

“What is the likelihood of another terrorist-attempted attack on the US homeland in the next three to six months? High or low?”

The Admiral’s response: “An attempted attack, the priority is certain, I would say.”

His four fellow members on the panel, which included CIA Director Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller, agreed.

So no, not feeling the warm fuzziness. Rather, as I’ve said before, elections have consequences, and I see no clearer evidence of this than in the current state of our nation’s security — or lack thereof. For future reference, let’s all remember: Be careful who you vote for. He or she may just get elected. And I think even those swept up in the fervor a year ago are starting to see how devastating the consequences can be.

Betsy Siino | Comments