Hillary Clinton and the War on Terror

Former community organizer Barack Obama's administration is very disorganized. Members are in disarray. They aren't on the same page.

Supposedly, the Obama administration had adopted its own lexicon.

"War on Terror" was discarded and replaced with "Overseas Contingency Operation."

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano rejected "terrorism" for "man-caused disasters," making it clear that the administration made the change in order to move away from the "politics of fear."

But Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denies the new terms. She claims she's not banned from using "War on Terror." She's received no directive about it. She just is choosing not to use it.

Yeah, right.

From ABC News:

After days of confusion and denial about whether the Obama administration was officially no longer using the term "War on Terror," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that the Obama administration is no longer speaking of a "War on Terror."

"I haven't gotten any directive about using it or not using it. It's just not being used," said Clinton during a briefing with reporters aboard her plane to the Hague to attend an international conference on Afghanistan.

"The administration has stopped using the phrase and I think that speaks for itself," she said at a different point during her trip. "Obviously."

...The story began after the Washington Post's Al Kamen obtained an e-mail from an official in the Office of Security Review, Dave Reidel, saying that, "This Administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' (GWOT). Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.' "

Office of Management and Budget spokesman Kenneth Baer said, "There was no memo, no guidance. This is the opinion of a career civil servant."

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell added that he had "never received such a directive...Perhaps somebody within OMB may have been a little over-exuberant."

What has gone unnoticed, however, is that the discontinuation of the "war on terror" phrase also marks a departure for Secretary Clinton and President Obama.

During an April 26, 2007, debate in South Carolina, the moderator asked the eight Democratic candidates to raise their hand if they believed there is such a thing as a "Global War on Terror."

Clinton and Obama joined Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., in raising their hands, indicating that they believed that there is such a thing as a Global War on Terror, or GWOT.

Future Vice President Joe Biden joined former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., former Sen. Mike Gravel, D-Alaska, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, in not raising their hands, indicating that they did not believe that there was such a thing as a GWOT.

As reported at the time on ABC's "Political Radar," Edwards subsequently tried to use his misgivings with the "War on Terror" terminology to differentiate himself from Obama and Clinton. It didn't work. Though apparently Obama and Clinton may have been at least somewhat sympathetic to the argument.

This is all so lame.

How are we supposed to trust Obama and Hillary and others in the administration to protect us from terrorists or, if you prefer, "man-caused disaster-doers," if they are so reluctant to utter the word "terror"?

Hillary's remarks sound like they came out of Bill's mouth.

"I haven't gotten any directive about using it or not using it. It's just not being used."

"The administration has stopped using the phrase and I think that speaks for itself. Obviously."

What?

As they plot their next attack in their war against the U.S., Osama bin Laden and members of al Qaeda must be enjoying hearing Hillary and Obama and Napolitano dithering over terms.