Today’s New York Times has a big piece on how President Obama is fighting al-Qaeda, including the targeting without trial of Americans abroad. This paragraph stands out like a neon sign in Vegas (emphasis mine):
In interviews with The New York Times, three dozen of his current and former advisers described Mr. Obama’s evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the shadow war with Al Qaeda.
They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action without hand-wringing. While he was adamant about narrowing the fight and improving relations with the Muslim world, he has followed the metastasizing enemy into new and dangerous lands. When he applies his lawyering skills to counterterrorism, it is usually to enable, not constrain, his ferocious campaign against Al Qaeda — even when it comes to killing an American cleric in Yemen, a decision that Mr. Obama told colleagues was “an easy one.”
Oh, please. One, Obama’s evolution was predicted. Remember John Ashcroft’s answer to the question, how would Obama be different than Preisdent Bush?
“How will he be different? The main difference is going to be that he spells his name ‘O-b-a-m-a,’ not ‘B-u-s-h.’”
Or how Cheney predicted Obama would keep Guantanamo Bay open? This wasn’t an evolution, it was an education.
And two, where does the NYT get off saying that this is without precedent in presidential history? Yeah, Bush never had to face any of these challenges.
Never. Not a one.
How soon before Obama’s CIA has to “torture” a terrorist? More evolution?