July 9, 2012
I believe it’s called “change.”
Moe continues: “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.”
Okay, that’s harsher than mere mockery, but entirely deserved.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Prof. Stephen Clark writes: “Yes, Moe Lane’s observation is harsh and deserved. But, for all his righteousness, it’s a safe bet that Junod will vote for Obama again and not lose one night of sleep having done so: Have you no shame, Mr. Junod? Why ask?”
MORE: A reader emails: “I haven’t dug too deeply into the article or other commentary, but I find it ironic that Obama put in place protocols that end up killing innocent young men searching for their fathers, as that’s sort of what his whole first book is about and what endeared him to so many in the first place.”