Re my post, “Lynne Stewart, Her Sheik, and ‘The Demonized Other,’” Jack Kemp (writer, not politician) emails me:
Stewart’s despicable light sentence has one silver lining: It shows the Kerryesque Democratic claim – that we should handle terrorist cases in our domestic US courts, rather than use military Special Forces to eliminate terrorists – to be an impotent solution. The Clinton-appointed judge in the Stewart case signals loud and clear what would happen if the Democrats were in charge.
If I’d said two weeks ago that a Democratic administration would give traitors and terrorists lighter sentences than one gets for a second cocaine possession conviction, a number of Democrats would have said I was crazy, foaming at the mouth, a Right-Wing goober with a dirty Confederate baseball cap talking nonsense. Yet here, in full display, we witness the Democratic refusal to both believe we have enemies and also to protect our citizenry. A recent article by Mark Steyn in The New York Sun summed up the Democratic ‘post-history’ view of treason quite eloquently:Wow! Treason! First time in half-a-century, since the Tokyo Rose days. Since then, of course, the very word “treason” has come to seem arcane, if not obsolescent, like something some fellow in doublet-and-hose might accuse somebody of on “Masterpiece Theatre” but otherwise not terribly relevant and frankly no big deal: indeed, the campus left usually gives the impression that “treason” is little more than an alternative lifestyle, like transvestism.
All kidding aside, Steyn has captured how the Democrats refuse to grow up and accept adult responsibility for our security, in this case collective national adult responsibility to ‘provide for the common defense.’