How Long Until Conservatives Start Using the bin Laden Victory Against Obama?

Remember back in the 2004 Presidential election when conservative groups (with the tacit approval of the Bush campaign) spent big money on anti-John Kerry ad campaigns that turned the reality of Kerry's Vietnam War service and hero status into a liability?

You know, they "creatively" re-told his war service story in a way that questioned if he was even present at the scene of some of his most heroic actions, if he did what he said he did, whether he really merited the awards he won and even raising questions about whether or not he actually just shot some local Vietnamese in the back by mistake. While the messages came from several fronts, the primary identified group behind it was Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth.

Essentially, the incessant ad campaign run by those conservative groups re-painted Kerry's image as a war hero into a dishonest, wimp liar. It raised enough questions about his service to minimize or even eliminate his edge over Bush in terms of military service and command experience. It turned a Kerry strength into a weakness.

So I ask the question...

In the 2012 election, how long will it take these same type of conservative groups to start turning President Obama's bin Laden victory...and all of the positives that the results say about Mr. Obama's guts and leadership abilities...into a liability? I ask "how long" because I am 100% convinced they'll try.

You know...Obama didn't really authorize the mission because the military was already on it (and besides Bush had already set things in motion), Obama didn't really give the go-ahead for the mission, he was playing golf while the mission was going on, he took credit for the actions of the Seal team, he should have captured bin Laden alive and not "had him killed," Obama "lied" or "was less than honest" about the details of the raid, bin Laden isn't actually dead (or even if he is) and the mission was a ruse to boost Obama's military credentials, and on and on an on.

Basically, I see a series of ads questioning Obama's handling of the bin Laden mission that raises questions about his honesty and leadership abilities. The fact that bin Laden was hunted down and killed on Obama's watch and based on his orders will, of course, be ignored. Again, this will be an attempt to turn perhaps Obama's biggest strength and victory into something that is used against him to effect.

Also, as a reminder, the U.S. Supreme Court last year decided that companies have the same First Amendment rights of free speech as human beings. So, they can spend as much as they want on political advertising now...and they will. Which side do you think companies will mostly be on - Democrat or Republican?

To Release the Pictures Or Not?

To release the pictures or not?

That is the question of the moment regarding how to definitively prove to the world that Osama bin Laden is dead. While there is no serious doubt among Americans and many/most around the world, there are and will be doubters.

In my opinion, asking another question first will help answer the question over releasing the pictures. And that question is...

What of these two situations are worse...

Having large portions of the Middle East and terrorist groups literally bank on, recruit and appeal to anti-American sentiment based on the accusation that we really did not get bin Laden, he's still alive and appealing to the notion that we're unwilling to release pictures as their proof of argument?

OR

Having large portions of the Middle East react in revolt and anti-American sentiment to the gruesome picture of the dead bin Laden - not to mention terrorists groups mythologizing bin Laden as a martyr and appealing to terrorists to avenge his death?

It's a close call because both situations result in terrorists using the death or non-death as recruitment and motivational purposes. Either way, they're going to twist things and use them for their advantage.

All that said, as gratifying as it would be to show the U.S. haters in the Middle East just what the U.S. will do to them if they try and/or actually attack our country...I think the answer is actually to not release the pictures unless or until a material situation develops where we can achieve something by doing so.

By this I mean I think it would be worse for the greater Middle East to see the pictures and react in horror to them. We would be generating more bad will and potentially enemies in the region than would be the case if we don't release the pictures. After all, pictures are very tangible and real. They are portable and could be used as quite compelling recruitment tools. From what I've read, the picture that best IDs bin Laden is quite horrific with a huge wound to his face. This would definitely elicit a negative response in the Middle East. And besides, who wants to see a t-shirt with the destroyed head of bin Laden on it? What? You don't think that would happen? Of course it would, and probably here in the States by Tea Partiers or worse.

No, I say don't release the pictures - at least not now. Go ahead, let terrorists spin theories that bin Laden is alive. He's not. And that fact alone, regardless of spin, means Al Qaeda  and other groups are up shit creek. Meanwhile, we spare ourselves the negative reaction region-wide at a time when in many countries over there change is happening. And guess what? If we for some reason need to release the pictures to achieve something, we have them.

Obama, Bush and bin Laden

Now that the news of bin Laden's death is all over the place and people have had a chance to embrace and digest it in their own way, here are a few related thoughts on who secured this outcome and who did not - as well as a question about how long it'll be until we see the "bin Laden not really dead" theories materialize and from whom...

The Bush/Obama Comparison

• Attack. BUSH: The worst attack on American soil by foreigners - an attack masterminded and led by Osama bin Laden - occurred on the watch of President George W. Bush. OBAMA: Directed, sanctioned and gave the go ahead for the operation that found and killed bin Laden. And, no successful terrorist attacks carried out on U.S. soil in his presidency so far.

• Mission Accomplished. BUSH: Proudly flew that now infamous banner bearing that phrase on an aircraft carrier in the early days of the Iraq war - a war by the way that had nothing to do with bin Laden or the 9-11 attacks. I think we can all agree that the banner was a tad premature. That's being kind. OBAMA: No banners, no gloating or landing on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit like Bush. Nope, just a short announcement to the nation on a Sunday evening that justice had been served and confirming the killing of bin Laden. "Mission Accomplished" ineed.

• Quotes. BUSH: On Bin Laden in 2002: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." And: ""I am truly not that concerned about him." OBAMA: On Bin Laden in 2011: "Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body."

• Timing. BUSH: In office for eight years. No capture or killing of bin Laden. OBAMA: In office for just over two years and Bin Laden is dead. Those are the facts. My opinion is that the American people need to keep that in mind when judging Obama as a leader in the 2012 elections.

I think these facts and comparisons tell the tale quite well actually. Bush was a man who took his job lightly and coasted...to the degree that he ignored concrete evidence that an attack such as materialized on 9-11 was being planned. We know how that turned out. He then made a series of errors that not only did not kill bin Laden, but actually made our situation worse. Meanwhile, Obama is a man who apparently is on the ball and dead serious about fighting terrorism...to the degree that within two years of serving in office, bin Laden is dead.

Rumors and Conspiracy Theories
U.S. media is reporting that the body of bin Laden was burried at sea. So, as you read this post, the body of bin Laden resides in the cold, dark depths of the ocean. A fitting place for him for sure. But, no body to see means those who believe in him or his cause - or are against the U.S. or Obama - will be able to suggest that he is not really dead.

I think we'll see skeptism in two ways:

1. The Middle East. Indeed, the Middle East and Arab world thrive on ruomor and conspiracty theories. From listening to NPR today, I've heard this is already starting over there with people doubting the story of bin Ladens death.
2. Right wing conservatives in the U.S. There are those here who will not want to give credit to Obama for this action and will raise questions about whether bin Laden is really dead and/or that the whole thing was faked to make Obama look better going into the 2012 election cycle. Remember, there's a certain percentage (and a percentage who gets a lot of media attentions) who believe Obama was not born in the USA.

Obviously, for some people who don't want to believe it, no amout of disclosure will be enough to prove bin Laden is dead. In any caes, I will be quite interested to see if or how the U.S. proves to the world that bin Laden is indeed dead.