« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tom Junod’s cowardly attack on Barack Obama’s cowardly drone strikes.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  July 9th, 2012 at 09:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

You know what’s missing from this Tom Junod piece on drone strikes?(Via Instapundit)

Oh, sorry, quick background: a US drone strike recently killed a sixteen year old American called Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was the son of notorious traitor Anwar al-Alwaki. There’s no immediate reason to explain why the younger al-Awlaki was killed; it could be anything from an accident to a recognition of the old rule of thumb that ‘nits make lice.’ Anyway, Mr. Junod here is very, very upset that this death happened. He is very, very sternly lecturing the Obama administration about not revealing its reasoning for the death, assuming that the Obama administration even has one. Mr. Junod is very, very much the model of principled opposition to this “Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama,” as he so pithily put it. But, again: do you know what’s missing from this piece of Junod’s?

Any repudiation of this piece Junod wrote in response to Election Night 2008:

I wasn’t looking for hope, that’s for sure; I was looking for evidence that Obama couldn’t win in the face of an evil as potent as the Republican party. As my mother got weaker and the light began to be blanched from her eyes, I would go to the blogs right after my daughter went to school, and then just before I went to visit my mom, and then as soon as I came home, and then for a few minutes while my daughter took her bath, and then, after I kissed my wife and she went to bed, in the dark hour past midnight. I hated Joe the Plumber more than I hated anyone on earth. He was my comfort, because he was death itself, and he allowed me to hate not just him but it.

I’d told myself on the plane that I wasn’t going to look at any of the dozens of inescapable televisions that line the terminal in Atlanta. I’d told myself that I was going to wait till we got home and Nia got to bed before I started to check any of the returns. My vow lasted until I saw the hovering face of Campbell Brown reporting on Kentucky. Campbell, she of the gorgeous hair, was calling Kentucky for John McCain — and suddenly I felt something I hadn’t felt since my mother died. I felt nauseous. I was doubled over, not by the news of McCain’s win but by the prospect that Obama might lose.

Speaking as one of the ‘moldering’ people that the author later gleefully mocked in that article: YOU wanted this, Tom Junod. You wanted every particle of this. You drank deep at the well of hate in 2008, as the above passage shows, and in your hate you fixated on getting Barack Obama elected. And Barack Obama was. And then Barack Obama decided – because he was and is a weak man, with neither George W Bush’s compassion, nor Bush’s moral strength – to pursue the Global War on Terror on the cheap, and from a distance, and without listening to the screams. So, you want to know why Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was killed, Tom Junod? Why, it was all done for you. So that you could continue to hate your domestic opponents in peace, and without hindrance. Own it.

Coward.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    because we wanted justice for the three thousand who were murdered on September 11, 2001.

    Tom Junod went to war with Conservatives because he needed someone to hate.

    Tom Junod, I remind you of the axiom that your side of the aisle coined: “Hate is not a family value.”

    We on the right do not hate the left; we pity them for not being able to see and understand the world as it is, and we are hated in return.

  • Tbone

    It is what the Left has always done best. So, Tom, every time Obama’s drones rip people to shreds, it is because he wants votes. You helped put him there. It is YOUR fault.

    I love that.

  • Jack_Savage

    “As people all over the United States and then all over the world poured into the streets to protest Obama’s Lethal Presidency, the Lethal Presidency seemed to make everyone and everything that opposed it look not just prescient, not just wise, but decent – everything that the Obama administration lacked . If you wanted to see what people on the wrong side of history looked like, all you had to do was scan the pinched and boiled faces of those booing and hissing Obama when once they voted for and supported him: They were dead wrong and had the displeasure of knowing it. But such is the nature of stupidity, especially the stupidity that insists on splashing itself across the pages of a men’s magazine that no men read any more.”

  • Locked and Loaded

    In my thinking, pity does not fit at all. Loathe (it does not mean hate) is the word I would use.

  • Dave_A

    In a world where 16yos bear arms against the US, 16yos are valid military targets…

    We don’t spend 70k/missile, plus fuel for the drone & the opportunity-cost of tasking it to a specific mission vs having it available for others, to blow someone up over their last name…

    The probability that the apple fell right the **** next to the tree, is near-certainty.

  • audax

    Never heard of him……

  • BradE

    This administration has decided to pursue the Nation’s enemies from a safe distance. Safe from American body bags; safe from the political strain of owning a war; safe from having to defend defending our nation. Our President: still voting “present” after all these years.

    The trouble is that, in a war fought among and around civilians, a bomb, whether laser guided or not, is just not as precise as a 33 calibre sniper’s bullet. This means that there is going to be some “collateral damage” in the form of deceased bystanders when one of these wonders of modern warfare are called upon. Under past administrations these would be war crimes. Now? The bystanders are co-combatants, terrorists by association. Ah, what’s in a label? All of those people caught riding in the wrong cars at decidedly the wrong time; all those folks standing at the curb, waiting for the bus, at decidedly the wrong time; all those dependent wives and children that mistakenly hung around home when the drone came calling; all of these unfortunates must have been doing something wrong.

    Now, I’m not taking Mr. Junod’s side here nor am I necessarally against the use of drones. To be sure, iron bombs fall on the heads of the righteous and the un-righteous in a time of war. Not everyone in Dresden or Nagasaki were America’s enemy. I am not against using all means to defend our nation. I am against an anti-war president hiding behind the drones he sends in place of overt American power. Either this administration is fighting the “GWOT or it is not. The only things that are changed from the last administration are the words used and the goal of victory.

    It may be that Abdulrahman al-Awlaki is as guilty as his father. It may be that all the other named and un-named collaterally deceased were guilty. The problem is “it may be” as we don’t know. Our bombs are being thrown around in places we are not at war with because we lack the moral fibre to admit the truth or haven’t the diplomatic power to contend in any other way.

    We have found the way of the “weak horse” and we have become it.

  • romeg

    I prefer Gutless Feck

  • funwithknives

    You know,… That Magazine that simply “Everyone Reads”. { say it like an ‘Aryan from Darien’ }

    Gotta give you props Moe. How you can look at this stuff is more than I can bear for extended periods.

    Here’s a: Hoo–Raahhh, for yah’….

  • goodgovernance

    I’ve got no problem with killing underage terrorists who are a threat. And the chances this person was a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer like his father are high. But we in the public don’t know that for certain.

    What you have here is a situation where the President of the United States pointed his finger at an American citizen and said, “That guy dies.” Or at least, this is the likely situation since we know how closely and personally involved Obama is with the kill list.

    I’m for limited federal powers. Should the president have this kind of unchecked authority to kill American citizens? Junod may be a world class prick but I’ll give him points as a liberal for at least calling out Obama on this while most Democrats never, ever would (though they would have called for George Bush’s impeachment over this stuff).

    Basically we’re just trusting Obama got the right guy, and he doesn’t have to prove a thing to anybody whether he did or didn’t. I don’t like this precedent.

  • Dave_A

    The killing of small numbers of enemy troops with small precision-guided missiles shouldn’t even rise to the level of the JCS, much less the President…

    If we can have 2 guys blown up by a fighter jet, because (A) Surveillance assets have detected them & confirmed they’re riding motorcycles with prohibited weapons on their backs, and (B) the local Afghan leadership says ‘Taliban’…. We can blow up Al-Awaki Jr on the word of a competent US operative (possibly with local-national confirmation, if unsure) indicating that he’s an enemy combatant, to higher command…

    Shouldn’t be an issue for the politicians at all…

    Citizenship or country of origin shouldn’t matter, when targeting enemy combatants overseas.