Cowardice, expediency, language, and liberals

By A.J. DiCintio

From the moment news broke that the radical Islamist and al Qaeda terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had failed in his attempt to murder hundreds on Christmas Day, I've been waiting for members of this liberal administration — especially Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and her boss — to woman and man up.

Patiently waiting.

But I've had it with waiting, so much so, as a matter of fact, that I'm letting loose my frustration by tweaking this line from Emerson and expressing it with a hurricane of sarcasm:

For every Stoic was a Stoic; but in Liberaldom where is the Liberal?

A hurricane of sarcasm for sure, because the failed act of terrorism presented Secretary Napolitano with the perfect opportunity to reveal her deep love for man-caused disaster, the abominable euphemism she coined as an antidote to the revulsion she experiences every time the Plain English of terrorism beats against her brain.

But she didn't seize the day, giving in, instead, to the contemptible poisons oozed by Cowardice and Expediency.

Too bad, because the Secretary could have proudly revealed she's bravely sticking by her March '09 interview with Spiegel Online, in which she defended her coinage, explaining that it "demonstrates that we [of the Obama administration] want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur."

But that's not all. By failing to invoke her beloved phrase every time she opened her mouth (an act of cowardice she also exhibited after the terrorist murders at Fort Hood), Napolitano missed a perfect opportunity to demonstrate that liberals aren't afraid to wear their ideology on their sleeves as they proudly explain how the "moving away from fear" business is working out and the "being prepared for all risks that can occur" thing is coming along.

Now, as we all know, Mr. Cowardice and Ms. Expediency don't limit their work to Washington (even though they maintain their World Headquarters in that city.) So it is that the duo flew to Hawaii, where they dripped their poison into President Obama's ear.

Keeping its magnificent record among political frauds intact, the toxic stuff worked to a tee; and the nation's Number One Liberal, who ought to have salivated over the chance to stomp out the "politics of fear" by speaking a thousand man-caused disasters from Hawaii's Iolani Palace to the White House, failed to utter the phrase even once.

In fact, the duo's toxins worked so well that the president also did a perfect job of eschewing overseas contingency operation, the contemptible euphemism which, in the first few months of his administration, he insisted was absolutely necessary as a replacement for the dangerously fearful War on Terror.

Avoiding that phrase, in turn, caused yet another lost opportunity; for had the Commander-in-Chief spoken it, he would have been reminded to explain one of his very important overseas contingency operations, specifically — given that Umar Abdulmutallab of Christmas Day fame absolutely loves Yemen — the policy of "repatriating" Yemeni perpetrators of man-caused disasters to their native land.

(According to the Washington Post, Guantanamo can provide a total of 97 Yemenis to help perverse change agent Obama fulfill his hope-bloated death-plan.)

Alas, we can only imagine how good the president would have felt about himself after being honest with the American people regarding this particular devil in the details of liberal foreign policy.

But the good feelings wouldn't have ended there; for his brave example would certainly have produced a catalytic effect regarding courage and honesty throughout the administration.

Secretary Napolitano, for example, would have sent a Matthewsian thrill up his leg by immediately rushing to Katie Couric's studio and gushing an ocean about how the system worked —

. . . when the administration learned in August of '09 that al Qaeda had used PETN (the "underwear" explosive) in an assassination attempt on the chief Saudi officer in charge of combating man-caused disasters.

. . . when in that same month "the NSA intercepted telephone conversations in which the leaders of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula talked about the possibility of using an unidentified 'Nigerian' bomber in an attack." (Reuters)

. . . when the administration learned that Abdulmutallab's father had spoken with U.S. Embassy officials in Abuja about his son.

Finally, feeling oh so very good and brimming with confidence as a result of the brave, principled acts sweeping across his administration, the president could have invited Brian Williams to conduct an Oval Office interview that NBC would have profusely advertised as "What Obama Hath Wrought!"

In the interview, the president could have bravely looked the American people in the eye and explained that his plan to defeat the incorrigible psychopaths, sociopaths, and fascists who carry out man-caused disasters takes time patience, and faith.

"A whole lot of time, patience, and faith," he could have said, "as is always the case when overseas (and domestic) contingency operations are based upon Hope, New Beginning speeches, World Apology Tours, and Political Correctness."

Yes, as proud, honest, dedicated liberals, Obama and the members of his administration could speak to the American people about the liberal ethos regarding terrorism, courageously using language they have meticulously developed for the task.

But they don't, proving once again that while those who make a religion of politics and gods of politicians talk a good show about how Emerson's triumph of principles guides their every act, the inescapable truth is that their very ideology makes them perfectly susceptible to the fears whispered by Cowardice and the promises proffered by Expediency.

© A.J. DiCintio