I’m stuck in cynic mode…
We have been told that Obama represents the ultimate incarnation to date of the master politician but I’ve always been doubtful because without the help of a compliant and often disinterested media, he would have been torn apart like a bleeding fish during a shark feeding frenzy. However, given that Obama got elected twice as an empty suit, there might have been some credence to that…
In his entire career, Obama has never made a move unless it was politically advantageous to his career, to the point of having quite a history of “voting present” to avoid taking a position on issues that he couldn’t later spin to his benefit. This is a man who has spent a lifetime perfecting the craft of saying everything while saying nothing, mastering the art of giving speeches that are so empty of content that they can be interpreted to mean anything the bias of the listener wants them to mean and the ability to generate a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. He spends more effort avoiding responsibility that it would take to actually do something.
This is why the Bergdahl deal is confusing to me – what political gain does Obama get for it? By all accounts, Bergdahl is a deserter who seemingly disavowed his mission in Afghanistan and chose to walk into the open arms of the enemy. He is also suspected of actively collaborating with the Taliban against his fellow soldiers.
Six soldiers died during the search for Bergdahl, countless others in the war that captured this Taliban starting five, not to mention the hundreds – perhaps thousands – of Shiite Muslims killed by Norullah Noori – one of these GITMO inmates. Hell, even the UN wanted this guy held as a war criminal.
Maybe he will read about Bergdahl’s alleged desertion and collaboration in the Washington Post today or maybe see it on CNN as he is channel surfing during the commercial breaks in “House of Cards”.
Seems pretty politically flat footed to me. Is Bowe Bergdahl the kind of poster boy that Obama wanted for his “triumph” of “negotiation”?
Obama’s “leave no one behind” falls flat even with Democrats after Benghazi where this administration did leave 4 people behind and never lifted a finger to help them. Neither he nor Hillary sent any help to Libya, yet he is willing to break the law to exchange these five really bad guys for one alleged deserter? Even the most die-hard Obama sycophant must be doing a little head scratching over this one.
I think there are many Democrats who were willing to bite their tongues over Benghazi as long as Obama kept his mouth shut about it – but for Obama to compound the Benghazi lie by claiming that the Bergdahl trade represents some sort of commitment to honor and responsibility is a line they won’t cross because they know that such a commitment was missing in Benghazi.
This “deal” with the Taliban brings that into glaringly clarity when the lawless “we must act!” actions of this regime in the Bergdahl case is compared to the total lack of any action during the Benghazi attack – except of course the calls to YouTube to take down the video as the attack was raging.
There is just no upside to this. It just invites comparison and contrast to Benghazi at a time people like Elijah Cummings and Hillary Clinton claim that there is nothing to see here, let’s move along.
Even those who want GITMO closed know that this was a bad deal. Even those who hate “Bush’s wars” know that this was a colossal mistake that will cost America more lives in the future. Even Obama’s staunchest supporters are expressing concern about his disregard for established law in this case, not understanding the urgency after five years. Even they understand what a dangerous precedent Obama has just set.
Now the even the Cubans want to get in on the deals at Crazy Barry’s “Buy here, pay here” Used Terrorist Lot.
If there are Democrats who aren’t squirming every time a member of the Obama administration says “leave no man behind”, they are truly evil.