I'm not referring to the obvious stupidity of revealing our internal reasoning on this subject to our enemies. Nor do I mean the obvious stupidity of a President who has now told his advisers that "whatever you tell me may be revealed to the public someday by a future President. Some future Congress or DOJ might decide that your advice constituted illegal incitement to commit crimes against humanity. They might prosecute you, but I won't, I promise. Now, what was it you wanted to tell me?"
No, I mean that what is REALLY wrong is that nothing was gained by the United States when these details were revealed. So far, only Brit Hume has noticed this. I'd like to go a bit farther than just the question of what was gained?-nothing-and look at why the memos were released, assuming that somebody thought something would be gained or they wouldn't have released them.
Let's start with the person who made that decision. That is, of course, Barack Obama. He went against the advice of all living CIA Directors, including his own, when he declassified those memos. As near as I can determine, the only reason he's given for doing so is that it will make us all safer because the rest of the world will now know that we, as a country, won't do the activities discussed in the memos. But why did the memos themselves have to be revealed to achieve this dubious goal? Couldn't he have done as well by simply stating that "We don't torture. Period. And by that I mean we don't do the following," and list whatever he wants to. Wouldn't that have achieved the same thing, without giving up any Executive Privilege, and without exposing past, present, and future advisers to unnecessary scrutiny for simply giving the President advice? The answer is, obviously, yes, it would have had the same result. This means that his given reason doesn't hold water any better than an al Qaida terrorist after a serious interrogation.
So what is the REAL motive for Obama? It has to be a strong one for him to go against the advice of his own CIA drector, Leon Panetta. What does logic tell us it is? It tells us that Obama's gigantic ego and inferiority complex has overruled Panetta's brain.
Inferiority complex? How is that possible? Isn't he the greatest President ever, even smarter than Hillary Clinton, who is the smartest woman in the world? Well, no, and his decisions make that apparent. But he may well be the most arrogant President ever.
Forget about what he's said while campaigning; think about what he and his surrogates say and do every day. One of their bad habits is to make it clear that anything bad that happens is left over from the Bush administration, it isn't Obama's fault. In fact, nothing is Obama's fault. They even do it when it makes no sense at all, about trivial things. They are obsessed with avoiding blame for anything. That is his gigantic ego running amok.
More importantly, this President is obsessed with proving that he's better than George W. Bush. The policies of the Bush administration are always the "failed policies of the Bush administration" when Obama speaks about them. We don't just reject torture, we "no longer tolerate torture during the interrogation of prisoners," leaving he clear implication that torture was approved under the Bush administration. Guantanamo Bay Prison isn't just the best facility we have for holding prisoners captured during the war on terror and al Qaida, it's a "disgraceful blot on our national honor, which I promise we'll close ASAP." (OK, I can't find that quote, but I'm close.) Statements and actions like those are a pretty good indicator of severe feelings of inferiority. When you constantly have to prove you're better than somebody else, it's clear that you don't believe it yourself.
Now the picture emerges. Our country gains nothing by the release of the memos, but Barack Obama gets to give himself a big pat on the back for not only not being Bush, he shows us just how bad Bush was, because Bush had advisers who didn't think waterboarding and other rough tactics were OK when dealing with these prisoners. Bush really was the Devil; Hugo Chavez was right. That makes Obama so much better than Bush it isn't even a matter for discussion.
It's terrible to have to say it, but it's terrible behavior on the part of Obama--he released those memos for the same reason he does everything else, for self-promotion purposes. By trashing Bush, he makes himself look better. His inferiority complex required it, and his ego told him that it would be OK, no matter what Panetta and the others told him. And before you say, "Aw, shucks, he couldn't be that bad," think about this: Any other plausible reason is even worse, involving a lack of concern for the fate of his country or an abdication of his decision-making authority to one of his less patriotic advisers, perhaps one who has already admitted performing violent acts against the Government in the past. Such a person would likely have no compunction about damaging his country, even if his "friend" Obama is now President.