There have been some events in the news in the past few days that are so interesting as to be positively disturbing.
President Bush’s commutation of Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Cutting federal sentencing guidelines off at the knees or reassurance that there is still room for mercy in heart of our President? However you come down on said issue, the Chicago Tribune conducted a poll and published the results.
* * * * *
Here’s an interesting note from a site called Let’s Roll! 9/11 Made Simple. Former Senator Rick Santorum is being quoted from an interview given recently in which he insinuates that there’s a lot that could happen between now and November, 2008. Another terrorist attack on US soil, perhaps?
Santorum Suggest New Terror Attacks Will Change View Of War
Senator predicts “unfortunate events” within a year that will alter perceptions
Paul Joseph Watson
Saturday, July 7, 2007
In an alarming display of fearmongering, Republican Senator Rick Santorum has suggested that a series of “unfortunate events,” namely terrorist attacks, will occur within the next year and change American citizen’s perception of the war.
Appearing on the Hugh Hewitt radio show, Santorum also hyped the necessity of “confronting Iran in the Middle East,” and predicted that Giuliani, Romney and Tommy Thompson would be the three surviving Republican candidates who would go head to head in the race for the nomination.
Santorum went on to clearly imply that terror attacks will occur inside America which will alter the body politic and lead to a reversal of the anti-war sentiment now dominating the country.
“Between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public’s going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events, that like we’re seeing unfold in the UK. But I think the American public’s going to have a very different view,” said the senator from Pennsylvania.
Is Santorum expressing foreknowledge of some coming atrocity or is he merely using a tactic familiar to the leadership of his party – exploiting the fear of terror for the purposes of political rhetoric?
Last month, the new chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party Dennis Milligan said that there needed to be more attacks on American soil for President Bush to regain popular approval.
“At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001],” Milligan told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, “And the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country,” he concluded.
Yearning for new mass casualty terror attacks for political gain is a GOP strategy – Milligan is merely parroting what was written in a leaked confidential memo that was circulated among senior Republican leaders in late 2005.
“A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and “restore his image as a leader of the American people,” reported Capitol Hill Blue on November 12, 2005.
* * * * *
I don’t know why, but I’m most disheartened by the President’s request and subsequent obedience by Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor to refrain from giving testimony before Congress. How can you do that, no matter what side of the fence you fall on? When Congress calls, you give your sworn testimony. Their subpoena power is valid. And if the President hadn’t abused his right to invoke executive privilege so often before now, this one might just slide by.
Oh, and did you hear the one about the Vice President who stated that he doesn’t belong to the Executive Branch of the US government? Damn. How much can this Administration pervert the Constitution and federal law before we all scream for them to just stop it!?