Why would Obama's campaign strategist attend Obama's Kill List Meetings

David Axelrod evidently attended the highest level national security meetings that decided who would be subjected to targeted assasination from above via drone strikes. Daniel Harper reports in the Weekly Standard:

The New York Times has a very lengthy article today on President Barack Obama's war on terrorism policy. Obama himself, at his weekly "Terror Tuesday" meetings, "[insists] on approving every new name on an expanding 'kill list,' poring over terrorist suspects' biographies on what one official calls the macabre 'baseball cards' of an unconventional war," the Times reports.

But perhaps the oddest revelation in the news story is this: David Axelrod attended Obama's "Kill List" meetings. As the Times notes:

David Axelrod, the president's closest political adviser, began showing up at the "Terror Tuesday" meetings, his unspeaking presence a visible reminder of what everyone understood: a successful attack would overwhelm the president's other aspirations and achievements.

"[A] successful attack would overwhelm the president's other aspirations and achievements" is how the Times explains Axelrod's presence. So are we to believe that President Obama seeks success in killing terrorists off his list because it will help his political goals? Apparently so.

Shouldn't these decisions be made strictly on security grounds --and kept as secret as possible? Or does President Obama just need some handholding to buck him up?

Recall that one of their campaign themes has been "Bin Laden is dead, GM is alive," so clearly they think killing terrorists from above is a way to score political points. Of course, the big picture geopolitical changes -- a resurgent and angry Russia, an expansionist minded China, a nuclearizing Iran -- get a pass.

Wonder if Axelrod has security clearance? Recall that Axelrod also attended meetings with Netanyahu-why was he there then?

This offers one more example of how Obama's decision-making process (such as it is) is faulty. Not only does he seem to rely on too few people -- primarily himself -- but the wrong people who are far from being experts in national security.

And they said Bush was some figure from the Wild West.

bumped