Tuesday, April 05, 2011
To my Democrat friends who find themselves to Obama's left as he's broken his promises to you
You know I'm no fan of President Obama. I'm even less of a fan of Attorney General Eric Holder.
But when you find yourself clearly to the left of Obama and Holder — because, for example, they've repeatedly broken their promises to you about such things as closing Gitmo or trying KSM in civilian federal court in Manhattan — isn't that a really auspicious time to reconsider, with as much diligence and sincerity as you can, the validity of your own positions?
No one thinks Obama wants to move to the center. No one — and certainly no one at the brand-new Obama 2012 campaign HQ — has any illusions about whether those moves will depress both current support on the left and, eventually and more critically, voter turn-out by the left in November 2012. No one except Obama himself could have forced Obama to do these things that are upsetting you. Aren't you at least willing to reconsider that which the president you so admired finds so compelling that it has forced him to make changes he absolutely hates making?
Couldn't it be you who's wrong?
I say this not so I can say "I told you so," but to help you find a means to process the many further disappointments you're certain to see between now and next election day.
Note: Trackbacks are moderated and do not appear automatically. They're also spam-filtered. Feel free to email me if yours didn't go through. Trackbacks must contain a link to this post. TrackBack URL for this entry:
Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to To my Democrat friends who find themselves to Obama's left as he's broken his promises to you and sent a trackback ping are listed here:
If anyone's interested, here's why I'm even less a fan of Holder than I am of Obama:
The POTUS, any POTUS, has to be a politician. Even a POTUS in his second term has to be concerned about his fellow partisans' continued election success.
Politicians do things for political reasons sometimes that are contrary to their core principles. A prime example would be Bush-43's imposition of high tariffs on steel back in his first term.
Even though the POTUS and the Attorney General of the United States have both taken solemn oaths to protect and defend the Constitution, however, the Attorney General has an additional and independent responsibility as a member of the legal profession. He is the lawyer for the United States of America. There is no more righteous client, and no greater professional responsibility. There is no higher ethical responsibility than that which he holds. And that's why John Mitchell, for example, was a much bigger crook in my view than Richard Nixon. They both betrayed their oaths to the United States and its Constitution, but Mitchell also betrayed his fiduciary responsibility as America's lawyer. Nixon, although a member of the bar, wasn't purporting to be America's legal counsel. Neither is Obama.
I don't like it when a politician compromises his principles, but I recognize that sometimes it's expedient, and it may even be essential to a greater good. But that excuse won't cover an attorney general's compromise of his principles.
Holder, as an AG, has been a politician first and a lawyer second. I'm not going to run through all the reasons I have for that conclusion, or debate it in detail here. But that's the explanation for my second sentence in this post.
(2) ColoComment made the following comment | Apr 5, 2011 7:57:16 PM | Permalink
Completely agree with your evaluation of Holder's professional behavior. The AG's primary duty is to the country, not to a president nor a party. He should be held to an especially high ethical standard.
Holder. Napolitano. Salazar. Sebelius. To name just four of Obama's cabinet.
The Republic is not being well served by these sycophants, incompetents and amateurs.
The next two years will seem like forever.
The comments to this entry are closed.