Darn...They're Not Named 'Smith,' Either!
Shortly after the 2009 Fort Hood terror attack was carried out by Nidal Hasan, Martha Raddatz and Diane Sawyer of ABC News openly lamented that the killer's name was not something like Smith.
They pretended to overhear this sentiment from some military wife at the fort, but I suspect otherwise -- that they were pulling the liberal trifecta of lying, projecting, and conflating victims with experts -- all simultaneously.
I guess it's progress, of some sort, that Salon's David Sirota didn't bother hiding behind an anonymous victim a few days ago when he said -- in his headline, no less -- "Let's Hope the Boston Marathon Bomber is a White American." Ups for being candid I suppose.
And Sirota's hopes were technically fulfilled, as it turns out, though I'm thinking white Chechen Muslim Jihadists were not what he had in mind.
Meanwhile, Obama guru David Axelrod pretended to really believe that it was certainly the act of some kind of conservative extremist, given that the bombs went off on April 15, ironically celebrated at the home of the Boston Tea Party as "Patriots Day." Did Axelrod really believe it? For some reason, I'm reminded of George Costanza's advice on Seinfeld about fooling a polygraph: "Jerry, it's not a lie...if you believe it."
Which brings us to our president, who is neither a white American nor named anything like Smith, and with whom no progress has been made on the candor front. In 2009, after Hasan's atrocities, Obama and General Casey wandered around Fort Hood like clueless yet self-righteous parents at a "don't keep score" little league game, pretending not to have any idea what the score was -- and congratulating themselves on their holy ignorance.
The kids in the dugout always know the score, though. And the soldiers at Hood knew, too, along with all thinking Americans. It was obviously Jihad 14, Fort Hood 0. And yet, the same cause-and-effect wizard who immediately surmised that the "Cambridge cops acted stupidly" in the Gates case refused to voice the obvious about the attack. Even today, we are still told the massacre was a case of "workplace violence" and that the Fort Hood killing spree is not officially listed as a terror attack on American soil.
(As an aside, Hasan knew that all the soldiers at Hood were ammo-free, thanks to political correctness, but it's not like gun rights are an issue now or anything.)
Apparently, Obama is still in that "don't keep score" mode, emphasizing right after the capture of Dzhokhar "Not Smith" Tsarnaev, that we must not "jump to conclusions" and "take care not to rush to judgment" in the Marathon bombing case. Isn't it astounding how liberals never want to rush to judgment -- unless, that is, a rush to judgment is perfectly appropriate?
And speaking of not rushing to judgment, this is still a problem with many of those we depend on to keep us safe. While millions of shampoo bottles and Swiss Army knives were being stolen from law-abiding citizens in airports by TSA agents, authorities had plenty of warnings about Major Hasan's extreme anti-American views. Yes, an American Army major is anti-American, and the military brass knew it, and yet they did nothing about it. Meanwhile, the FBI had been warned about the elder "not named Smith" brother in Boston several years ago and determined that he was not a threat, either. We must not rush to judge, you know. As it turned out, the military brass and the FBI were both terribly wrong. They should have rushed a bit.
In fact, I wonder if liberals even know the score now. (Jihad 3, Boston 1.) Memo to Obama, Sirota, Raddatz, and Sawyer: the score is always obvious, as is who the enemy is. We'll never stop these awful events until we can grow up and admit this. Actually, about half of us have. Now, can we have our 4-ounce toothpaste back?
C. Edmund Wright is author of the newly released WTF? How Karl Rove and the Establishment Lost...Again, available on Amazon.