Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Althouse

Legal Commentary

: Althouse

"Ooh, baby, baby, it's a wild world. It's hard to get by just upon a smile..."

Cat Stevens sang that:

And we were talking about smiling. Do you use that tremendously effective device, the smile? It's hard to get by just upon a smile, but it could work as part of a repertoire. Here in Wisconsin, the smile is deployed. And go to Indiana. You'll find some heart-melting smiling amongst the Hoosiers.

But what of people who don't rely on smiling? There are places ? maybe places where they call Wisconsin and Indiana "fly-over country" ? where people not only don't try to get by just upon a smile; they don't smile at all. And they mistrust those who do rely on smiling. Do you think those people are surly? They think you are unsophisticated. For example, Dick Cheney doesn't smile.

Oh, yes, he does!

Uh! Wow. Now, I need to rethink this. Hmmm. Not sure I know what to do with that smile. Don't try to get by just upon that!

Hey, Cheney is getting blogged like mad today. What the hell did he say?

?[W]e are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren?t, it makes us less safe.... Why doesn?t he want to admit we?re at war? It doesn?t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn?t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency ? social transformation ? the restructuring of American society.?

Obama wanted to smile at the whole world:

But it's hard to get by just upon a smile.

You can become President just upon a smile... and not much more. But then what do you have?

You're not the world's nice guy. It's not a cocktail party. It's real, and we're the United States.

"As I?ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won?t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won?t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won?t be at war.

?He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won?t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ?war on terror,? we won?t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren?t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn?t he want to admit we?re at war? It doesn?t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn?t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency ? social transformation ? the restructuring of American society. President Obama?s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war."

Back to Cat:

Full post as published by Althouse on December 30, 2009 (boomark / email).