Obama Flirts With A Catastrophic End To His Presidency

Putting aside all the political posturing, the factual back-story of Obama's plans to release, or prosecute terrorist detainees compels the calculation that his final decisions could end any effectiveness for his administration in, quite literally, a flash. Dukasis' Willie Horton problem comes to mind. The details actually point to an increased risk for Obama.

My column today spotlights Yemen’s dangerous catch-and-release program for terrorists — and ours.

There have already been far too many news stories of former Guantanamo inmates having been re-captured, or killed on the battlefield. Yet, while so many have already been released, it was always stated, and logical, that as the number of inmates came down, we were increasingly talking about the worst of the worst. That, or the seemingly least able to be rehabilitated.

Forget the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, if just one single inmate released under Obama's watch is found at a future point to have played a role in a domestic act of terrorism here resulting in American deaths at home, Obama will not survive. I doubt any sitting President could effectively weather a determination by the American people that he was either unable, or unwilling to protect them from such an event.

Would you bet your career and your legacy on such an event taking place, especially given recent and past so-called systemic failures of our intel community and DHS, whatever the reasons why? I wouldn't. But like it or not, Obama is. With terrorist recidivism being what we've already observed, I'm not convinced it's a very safe gamble for anyone given the facts and realities involved.

Comments

[redc1c4]

i'll bet you Ear Leader goes ahead and does it anyway.... since he's going to go down in history as a failure, he might as well fail spectacularly.

its not like he has any love for this country, so why would he care?

[JustOneMan]

Obama responds to his critics....

"mommy… mommy… I didn't do it, it was Georgie, he did it!" ~ "but Barry, Georgie has been away now for almost a year??..how could it be his fault?" ~ "uh..I dunno."

[Fe]

hahaha You think he might care about his legacy? Career? hahaha He will spend the rest of his days making speeches with trusty teleprompter #1, and grooming Sasha for community organizing/political office. Obama isn't in charge! anymore than Ronald McDonald controls McDonalds, Inc. The Dems have auctioned off fiefedom's to the highest bidders. Eric Holder is running the Gitmo show. What a sound investment for his law firm, and their investors.

[Anon]

I appear to be in the minority, but I don't think the "Democrats are soft on terrorism" talking point is going to work, I know it worked well for several years, but its played out now.

The terrorists that have been released and apprehended were released under Bush, come on, it is beyond stupid to blame Obama for this.

I thought the Republicans had learned something from being thrown out of Congress in record numbers and losing the White House to a left wing empty suit, but maybe I was wrong....maybe the GOP is now as incapable of growth or change as the Democratic Party.

[southdakotaboy]

Anon the point of the post is that if he goes ahead and releases "new" batches of detainees and then they are at some later point involved in terrorism that kills American citizens here in this country.

More and more people are starting to believe that Old Floppy Ears is a failure as President.

[Evil Red Scandi]

@Anon - you pretty much nailed it. People have to remember the current batch of baddies was released by the Bush Administration. That doesn't excuse the idiocy occurring under Obama, but it's naive and foolish to believe that the Republicans were doing a great job. Better, perhaps, but not great. Either the upper echelons of the Republican party need to be purged, or people should go third-party. Don't fear it.

[Anon]

I guess my feeling is that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Obama other than the idea that potentially, maybe he's going to release people from Gitmo who will go on to commit acts of terrorism [which Bush already did].

I mean is the fact that he's put the country further in debt in a year than any other president in modern times, that he's taken control of huge swaths of the economy--banks, autos, health care with his stupid socialist idealistic vision not enough??????

Why does anyone need to make up something about Obama when there are so many 100% factual reasons to call him a failure?

There is no question the country needs a third party, but where is it going to come from? Who would fund it? For a viable third party to come from the ground up a la the tea parties it would have to be many, many times larger than it is now.

[Xiaoding]

"The terrorists that have been released and apprehended were released under Bush, come on, it is beyond stupid to blame Obama for this."

Then how far beyond stupid is it to repeat the same error, in light of previous experience? It is in insanity land now.

How far beyond stupid, to try terroists in civil court, for millions of dollars, dollars that could pay for better security? It is insane.

"if just one single inmate released under Obama's watch is found at a future point to have played a role in a domestic act of terrorism here resulting in American deaths at home, Obama will not survive."

LOL! You drasticcally overestimate the intelligence of the American people! And underestimate their capacity for denial. We could have attacks in the malls daily, and still Obama would be presidnt!

[pagar]

""Democrats are soft on terrorism"

What pray tell has changed? The only modern day Democrat who even dared mention standing up to terrorism had to leave the party and is now listed as an Independent. Sen Kerry, the Democrat who led the fifth column in the states for the North Vietnamese; who could never have defeated our fighting forces and those of our Allies in Vietnam without the support of the Anti America Americans, Kerry led in America. Sen Rockefeller had to go running off to tell Syria (IN Jan 02) that America was going to attack Iraq.

"SEN. ROCKEFELLER: No. The — I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I'll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq"

Democrats soft on terrorism has to be the understatement of our lifetime.

[Peter]

"the current batch of baddies was released by the Bush Administration"

Who ran Congress in 2007 when they were released? Who ratcheted up the public pressure all the while these Boy Scout wannabes were at Club Gitmo? Democrats. Dick Turban. John F-ing Kerry, who by the way served in Vietnam. Bela Pelosi. Chicken Jack Murtha. Oh, John McCain and Lindsey Grahamnesty as well.

True, Bush should have held his ground in retrospect, but when you are getting hammered daily by jihadist appeasers and others who think all they did was wander through the Iraqi desert in search of a 7-11, you might understand why.

These people are an epic FAIL that are going to get thousands and thousands of Americans if not more killed. And the blood will be on their hands.

[Peter]

Democrats have always been soft on terrorism and national security since the San Francisco wing prevailed over the JFK/Scoop Jackson wing in 1972.

[pagar]

From Gateway Pundit-more than the Democrats ever wanted you to know about who really got those guys released.

Eric Holder’s Firm May Have Represented Undie Bomber Mastermind Before His Release

[Elmo]

"Obama Flirts With A Catastrophic End To His Presidency"

It was over before he was elected.

The day he was born in Mombasa.

When he traveled to Pakistan, on an Indonesian passport.

When he lied on his bar application [now no longer a member, resigned (rather than be prosecuted)].

When he toasted Kahalidi, and called Israel practitioners of genocide.

His administration is already over.

Somebody wake Tchaikovsky and tell him the news.

[seekeronos]

Most Powerful Man in America: Not Obama.

If any one person could claim that title, it would be the chief of the Federal Reserve, Mr. "Time Magazine Scumbag of the Year" Ben Bernanke. It is he alone, who is, and will be, responsible for the economic ruin, and eventual dissolution of this republic.

As for the POTUS, that job gets auctioned off years in advance, by the Illuminatist groups that actually run this nation.

[PA]

"The terrorists that have been released and apprehended were released under Bush, come on, it is beyond stupid to blame Obama for this."

OK, I'll blame the left that pushed for those releases. Then I'll blame Bush for being naive enough to be believe the left's arguments that they were no longer a threat, which they plainly were.

If you want to back peddle and say the left was WRONG about pushing for those releases, then I'll agree with you.

[Tim]

Understanding how the media is in bed with the government (no matter who is in charge), How do we know it has not already happened?

[joyMc]

The Obama presidency is sad and unfortunate for America on many levels. Obama himself comes off these days as a guy just way out of his league. Not to mention the socialism, bowing like a fool to foreign kings, the fiscal mismanagement, the weak foreign policy, weakening national defense, the trying to push through policies the American people oppose, the coming downfall this year of the democrat congress, thugish Chicago style politics, the pantheon of little revolutionaries with which he surrounds himself, the birther rumors he refuses to effectively quell, the coming tax increases on the middle class to pay for his follies, the unemployment rate, pretend global warming and legislation secondary to that, etc, etc, etc and coming soon another push toward general amnesty for illegals. That should pretty much nail it down. start quacking Barry. It is going to take a long time to clean up this mess.