The current President acted without Pakistan's permission, but maybe the term "cowboy diplomacy" is outdated. Pakistan is angry. They say we violated their sovereignty. Do we accept it because of WHY we crossed their border? Has the time for people to criticize the President for acting "unilaterally" passed? Or maybe . . .
The President ordered an unarmed man to be shot in the face in front of his wives and children. Do we accept it because of who we shot, or because we spent our venom on the "enhanced interrogations" that put us on the dead man's trail? Or perhaps . . .
The President has friends high up in the business world who have gained privileges and profit from his policies. Have we embraced cronyism? Perhaps our opinion of oligarchy changes according to the chief oligarch. Or, um . . .
I remember people defacing their bumpers with stickers decrying the fact that the price of gas had gone up under the last president. They were, apparently, very angry. The price of gas has now gone up even more; but I haven't seen any updates. Did we as a people finally wise up and calm down? Have we given up the idiotic practice of synopsizing our venomous personality on a bumper sticker? Or maybe, just maybe . . .
One President had virulent protesters everywhere condemning his war. The next President continued these war policies, increased the death toll, added 30 thousand or so troops to the effort, and doubled the amount of drone attacks. One of these men was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Did the world embrace the war on terror? Are we just suckers for changes in terminology? Or is it possible that . . .
. . . we are a nation of knee jerk hypocrites, beholden to myopic political philosophies defined by hoodwinking, morally defunct political parties consisting of extremes designed to enforce each other for profit?