Playing Diabolical Games with Homeland Security

article top

For anyone who still doubts the malignant nature of the liberal media/Democrat Party “axis,” seeking to dominate Washington’s political discourse, David Broder’s July 6 column, entitled “Unprepared for Terrorists,” provides inarguable evidence. Liberals, in an effort to boost their believability, often bestow titles of honor upon one another. In Broder’s case, the title is “Dean” of Washington political correspondents. Under such a banner, he might be expected to operate above the petty and malicious partisanship that dominates Democrat ranks. However, the substance of his July 6 column, and in particular its final paragraph, shows him to be every bit as small and disingenuous as his most rancorous compatriots in the House or Senate.

According to Broder, Republicans in Congress have their priorities totally misplaced because they ostensibly prefer tax cuts for the wealthy over homeland security. But an objective analysis of the situation proves that it is the Democrats, as well as their media lapdogs (Broder among them), that hold to a twisted set of priorities, and are consumed by a desire to reacquire power inside the Beltway.


The facts speak for themselves. Last month, Democrats in the House introduced an amendment, ostensibly aimed at boosting homeland security by $1 billion, but stipulating that certain portions of the President’s recent tax reductions be rescinded in order to offset the cost. Recognizing the amendment as merely a ruse, intended only to give Democrats an issue about which they could “grandstand” in front of the cameras, Republicans refused to bite, and the amendment was subsequently rejected.

Clearly, within a federal budget of over two trillion dollars, the ability to reallocate $1 billion for homeland security does not hang precariously on a reversal of President Bush’s tax policy. Outside of that which had been fabricated by partisan Democrats, no “either/or” scenario existed, whereby the only source of the needed monies would necessitate a complete betrayal of the President’s tax plan. It was not the Republicans who, out of misguided priorities, were placing their fiscal policy ahead of the security of the nation. Rather, it is the Democrats who are willing to sidetrack discussions of sufficient homeland security funding in order to generate controversy and discord that they believe will play well on the nightly news.

Had Broder been of the stature so often claimed by his colleagues, he would have loudly denounced the inherent hypocrisy of this entire charade. Instead he diligently and enthusiastically “carried the water” for the liberal Democrats in Congress, and by so doing, added his own contribution to the antics in which they are willing to engage, ultimately at the expense of the nation’s security.

The same holds true for liberal Democrat/media discussions of possible Iraqi purchases of Uranium, continuing troop losses, or the firestorm surrounding those elusive weapons of mass destruction. No sane person (and certainly none of those with close ties to America’s intelligence gathering apparatus) could reasonably deny that Saddam Hussein had vigorously pursued the development of a massive arsenal, including biological and nuclear weaponry, for nearly two decades. Furthermore, it is beyond reason to suggest that he suddenly decided to dismantle his store of munitions, while refusing to tell anyone he had done so even when such an admission was the only thing that could have saved him from an American invasion. So, are those on the left preoccupied with the whereabouts of the missing weaponry, with their chief concern being to find every cache before such dastardly devices can be used against America? Certainly not.

If we are to believe their words, the biggest catastrophe to befall the United States in recent years was not September 11. It was the President’s single assertion, put forward during the State of the Union speech, that the Iraqis, according to British intelligence, had attempted to purchase Uranium from Nigeria.

The entire manner in which liberal Democrats have framed the weapons debate shows just how willing they are to make political hay out of the present situation, rather than working with the administration to ensure America’s security before the other “shoe” (or something much worse) drops. On the other hand, if it does, they can take the opportunity of massive death and tragedy to further discredit the President, postulating as to why he didn’t do more to preempt the attack. Ignoring the fate of common citizens, it could prove to be a “win/win” for liberal Democrats.

And this, Mr. Broder, is the right priority for homeland security?

”’Christopher G. Adamo was born in Cheyenne Wyoming, but has lived in several places, ranging from the East Coast to the West Coast, before settling back in southeastern Wyoming to raise his family. He has held an interest in politics for many years and has worked within the Wyoming GOP as well as the Wyoming Christian Coalition. His archives can be found at:”’