The Audacity of Smoke and Mirrors

Where was Barrack Obama in the run-up to the '06 elections, when the Democrats rallied behind a coordinated call for impeachment? In speech after speech, from coast to coast like a drumbeat, Democrat candidates and their supporters said the President lied about WMD in Iraq, abused his authority in Guantanamo, and violated the Constitution with wire taps. They told us his policies amounted to treason, and he should be impeached. Then after their dramatic election success the drums silenced. Calls for impeachment morphed to little more than complaints of incompetence - from the likes of Joe Biden amongst many. Once their goals were achieved, the Democrats smiled a Cheshire grin and redirected the public's attention. Where was Obama through this?

Regardless of what you think or feel about President Bush - blame, understanding, loathing, admiration, condemnation, or forgiveness - the claims made against him demanded impeachment. Did the President lie and abuse his authority in what amounted to treason? Failing impeachment, we'll never know. And we should! This is not about defending George Bush; this is about playing charades with our National Security: When does political hyperbole become malicious exaggeration? When does malicious exaggeration become dangerous lies? When do dangerous lies - a coordinated campaign of them, no less - become sedition, if not treason itself?

Some might say that's the past; elections are about the future. But what possible interest could honest citizens have in the future if not to correct wrongs of the past? Does fomenting unsubstantiated accusations of high treason rise to that level? Or do we just accept comments that destabilize our National Security as part and parcel of "political" speech? Have we grown so calloused we can't draw that line?

The Party of FDR wants to build a platform of "change," ostensibly to bring openness and truth to the political landscape. Yet their platform rests on campaign '06, when their rhetoric was intended to do no more than help them retake Congress, cripple the President, and condition the populace by demoralizing Republicans and bottling the Democrats' rage to uncork once again in '08. This seems so transparent one would think Republicans had been handed the signature issue of our day - restoring "faith" that our leaders can hold themselves accountable and play straight with the voters. If principles matter, what cause could be more germane to maintaining democracy? But such courage eludes the Party of Lincoln. Instead, the Democrats have shrewdly maneuvered to claim this mantle themselves! Thus our Country's comprehension of Truth has been fractured, defined by whoever can muster the most audacious contempt (just look at how fashionable it is to disdain President Bush) and integrity drifts perilously close to social convenience. Justice withers.

So what has Barrack Obama to say about this? Does he object to his party's contemptible tactics? Does he lament the harm done, or does he just hope to inherit the ill-gotten gain? Of course, these are rhetorical questions. Bush is to blame. So if Obama becomes President, collective vindictiveness will be largely the reason, and Republicans will have allowed it to fester. All change in not progress. Democrats swept into power on machinations that eclipse mere audacity. May they one day be swept right back out on the merits of their wanton pretense.