GCN Guest Opinion - Filed 8/21/05
Epitomized By The Democrat National Committee, The Left Arrogantly Presumes They Have All Of The Answers. However, Their Track Record Says Otherwise.
By Perry Hicks - Special to GCN
You can take most any topic where the Democrats have meddled and you will strike a deep vein of heart-felt stupidity. Take, for example, the “Wall of Separation” Clinton administration Deputy Attorney General, Jamie Gorlick, erected between the various law enforcement and military intelligence agencies.
The Wall was supposedly intended to preserve civil liberties by preventing the U.S. Government from spying on the general citizenry. Unfortunately, the Wall also kept the FBI from being appraised of terror threats arising from the entrance of Ahmed Ressam and Mohammed Atta into Canada and the Unites States respectively.
Atta, of course, was the head of Al Qaeda’s 9-11 terror cell and Ressam’s 1999 mission was to detonate a bomb at Los Angeles International Airport. Luckily, an observant Customs agent noticed that Ressam was unusually nervous and apprehended Ressam just as he was crossing the Canadian border near Seattle, Washington. A search of his car found it to be loaded with bomb making materials.
The French had been tracking Ressam for some time but because of the Wall, neither the FBI nor Customs had a clue as to the import of their lucky catch.
Mohammed Atta was another matter. Although a highly classified data mining military intelligence operation called Able-Danger had detected Atta about a year before 9-11, the wall kept Able-Danger from reporting Atta’s presence to the FBI.
This refusal to coordinate investigations is inexcusable because even the highly inept Clinton administration had identified Al Qaeda as a particularly dangerous national security threat- so much so they had even considered kidnapping Bin Laden from Afghanistan.
Jamie Gorelick served on the 9-11 Commission under protest from some who believe that she would have better served as a witness. In light that the Able Danger unit was kept from warning the FBI about Atta, and that this revelation was also conveniently omitted from what was supposed to be the definitive report on 9-11, it would appear the Clinton administration, though out of power for 5 years, is still able to brew potentially explosive scandals.
Combining their weak responses to Al Qaeda’s attacks on U.S. embassies in Africa, and two separate attacks on the World Trade Center with their history of hostility toward military preparedness, Democrats will indeed be cast in a very bad light.
Despite the vast military scale and national sponsorship characterizing modern terrorism, there are still those on the left that contend terrorism is best handled through law enforcement channels. They protest our military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq and harangue the president as a lying aggressor whose forays into those countries were unjustified. However, Able-Danger threatens to wreck that and many other 9-11 myths and paint the Democrats as utterly incapable of, if not woefully unwilling to, defending our country.
One may recall the 2002 accusations that Bush actually had foreknowledge of the 9-11 attacks and allowed them to happen anyway. Back then, left-wing pundits hoped to use America’s post 9-11 sentiments to undermine the president. They did so by sneeringly asking what did Bush know about 9-11 and when did he know it?
As it turns out, it wasn’t Bush who had foreknowledge, it was the Democrats.
Devoid Of Substantive Debate
While character assassination has been their favorite debating tactic long before the election of 2000, Democrats have since then been particularly nasty in their language toward President Bush and the Republicans in general. The problem with indulging in pejoratives, even if their fallacious assertions were true, is that it wastes valuable time and energy for no other purpose than wallowing in hate. It is uncomplimentary to the Democrat’s cause (whatever that may be) and deprives them of the ability to formulate alternative solutions to Republican proposals.
A liberal friend of mine recently dismissed my wasted energy argument by immediately erupting into a Bush bashing tirade insisting that “Dubyah” is a “dangerously evil political genius” and an “international terrorist” and a “dry drunk.”
He emphasized this last point by telling me, “You know, you can’t trust a dry drunk.”
I forced a moment of dumb silence on him when I stated that Bush could not be all of those things AND the gibbering, drooling, mouth breathing idiot as he had characterized Bush during the last election.
After an interval my friend finally gathered his wits and in response proclaimed, “If Bush is an idiot then he is an idiot savant who has consolidated power better than any president in the history of the United States.”
That kind of contorted logic should have been no surprise since the left is bereft of any well thought out solutions of their own. Hence, they have no place logically to go other than straight down into useless vitriol. They substitute substantive debate for sloganeering and name calling whenever they encounter what they see as noxious Republican proposals.
And to them, all Republican proposals are noxious- even if they later adopt some of them as the Clinton administration did back in the 1990s.
Other artsy tags Democrats use to amuse themselves and divert attention away from their lack of ideas are the ones claiming Karl Rove to be “Bush’s evil genius,” “Bush’s Brain,” or even “Bush’s Hit Man.”
No There, There
The problem here is that while Democrats were gleefully thinking up pejoratives for Karl Rove, they neglected to foresee the consequences they could suffer for attacking their enemies through a construct of lies. The left simply seizes on some plot that they think will damage the president and they run with it. It never occurs to them that the plot could backfire in their face.
Take, for example, the Valerie Plame/Bob Novak/Niger Yellow Cake affair. David Corn of The Nation either bought into, or theorized himself the notion that Rove had “outed” a covert operative, Valarie Plame, in order to get even with her husband, former ambassador, Joe Wilson. Corn published his accusations against the White House two days after Bob Novak linked the name Valerie Plame to Wilson.
Plame had been instrumental in sending Wilson to Niger for the purpose of checking out claims that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in “yellow cake” form. He returned and supposedly reported quietly back to the CIA. It was only later, after he had joined the Kerry presidential election campaign, that he publicly denounced the administration’s claims that Iraq was actively seeking to develop WMD.
It is illegal to knowingly expose a covert intelligence operative. Corn asserted that it was Rove who had given Plame’s name to Novak.
Democrats had hoped, like Wilson and Corn, that Karl Rove was going to be arrested and “frog-marched” out of the White House in handcuffs. The problem was that there was no there, there. Plame was not officially undercover- that having been blown by the Russians back in 1994. Plus, Time Magazine’s Matt Cooper testified to a grand jury that Rove never used her name and only responded to Cooper’s statement that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA with something to the effect of “I heard that, too.”
Plame could be guilty herself of revealing her so-called covert name and associations.
Back in 1999, Plame sent a campaign contribution to Al Gore using her maiden/cover name and stating her employer as, what has since been exposed as a CIA cover firm, Brewster-Jennings & Associates.
Using a maiden name as cover? What the heck was all that about? It never occurred to her that her marriage to Wilson created a VERY public record?
And according to the Washington Times, Plame “made no bones” about being a CIA employee and the wife of a diplomat and she is reported to have commuted to work at the agency’s Langley, Virginia headquarters for more than 5 years. Wilson’s neighbors are also reported to have known Valerie worked for the agency.
The only thing deep about Plame’s covert status is what the left wants to shovel at us.
Oh, But There Is Some There, There?
The real mystery, however, is why New York Times reporter, Judith Miller, is in jail. She did not write about Plame but there have been reports that she was somehow snared by an exchange of emails. Informed speculation amongst some in the press corps is that Miller is protecting a third unnamed source- or was even the revelator, herself.
Adding to this speculation is the way Novak has been grinning like the Cheshire Cat all through this torturous episode. It is almost as if he, too, has a non-administration source- or knows the identity of the original revelator.
In any case, it was very risky for the Democrats to charge into such claims without knowing all of the facts. As it stands now, no law has been broken and all the smoke and heat has been from Democrat aspirations to criminalize Rove. If a mystery outer does exist, and it does turn out to be a Democrat- such as Miller or Plame herself- then those calling for Rove’s head will find theirs lying on a silver platter.
It should be no surprise that the Washington press corps has backed away from this self-immolating story.
In Part Two we will see how the Left has bungled domestic policies that now threaten the very underpinnings of America.
About the Author.....
Perry Hicks is a former Mississippi Coast resident and was a correspondent for the old Gulfport Star Journal. He has appeared on Fox News Channel’s “The O’Reilly Factor.” Perry has also hosted his own radio talk show on the auto industry with a mix of politics. Perry is a former college professor and a frequent contributor to GCN writing on stories of national importance with local interests. His articles can be found in the GCN Archive.
Contact the Author: email@example.com