Rep. Peter King, perhaps the biggest ignorant blowhard in Congress, is quite upset about President Obama’s recent speech about changing our anti-terror policies. He’s not upset that Obama is almost certainly full of shit and isn’t going to change much of anything; he’s upset that Obama’s empty rhetoric included moral arguments.
KING: Listen, every soldier, every cop who is faced with a decision to make, life or death, does the best he or she can and I think our country has done more than any country in the history of the world to limit civilian casualties so that just offended me, that whole tone of it. [...]
As far as the policy …. I think this policy basically has worked … and perhaps we can fine tune it, we can put more emphasis on clandestine activity of actually gathering intelligence rather than relying so much on drones but for me i don’t think the president really addressed that in the speech. I think he was coming at it from a more from this moral tone which I just think was misplaced. I don’t think it’s called for.
So King, who voted for a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, thinks that it’s okay to invoke morality to diminish individual rights, but it’s “offensive” to invoke moral arguments when it involves torture and complying with the constitution that he undoubtedly claims to revere. Got it.
Like Dispatches on Facebook: