Well, There Is Polarizing and There Is Polarizing...

Every once in a while, I read a post from FoxNews, to remind myself that I should go easier on LewRockwell.com. Today, it was the smirking Michael Goodwin, with this complaint:

President Obama’s team put out an ad praising him for sending in Navy SEALs to kill Usama bin Laden and doubting whether Mitt Romney would have done it. To further exploit the one-year anniversary of Bin Laden's death, he gave an interview to NBC in the Situation Room, from where he observed the raid. And The Wall Street Journal revealed that the Obama campaign has an enemies list, a group of Romney donors it singles out by name on a Web site while declaring some got rich “at the expense of so many Americans.” 

As outrageous as those breaches of decency are, they are merely the latest extension of Obama’s polarizing presidency

You see, no Republican president would ever exploit military adventures for political advantage. No Republican politicians would ever stage a press conference at a site important to the "War on Terror." As far as the "enemies list" goes, as I recall, when a Republican president had such a list, he didn't put those people's names up on a web site; instead, he kept the list secret, and used it "to 'screw' Nixon's political enemies, by means of tax audits from the Internal Revenue Service, and by manipulating 'grant availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution, etc.'"

And let's talk about a polarizing presidency:
1) When Bush's presidency was polarizing, wasn't it because the people who were against him were traitors?
2) Mr. Goodwin, do you think that, to the extent your charge is true, it is true because you and your friends have spent four years calling Obama a Muslim agent, a socialist, anti-American, a disaster, and so on? That could have been any part of it?

OK, I have to go take a shower.