RSS Feed MenuAlthough there is marked disagreement on how to deal with terrorist suspects in custody (cue split screen of Eric Holder/Rudy Giuliani) a consensus has gelled that we were “lucky” that the Times Square bomb failed to detonate, just as we were lucky in the incompetence of the Christmas “underwear bomber.”
Some in the GOP see this apparent good fortune as a possible line of attack against the Obama administration’s anti-terrorism policy: “Yes, we have been lucky,” House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said Thursday, “but luck is not an effective strategy for fighting terrorism.” Conservative blogger Alan Caruba put it more bluntly: “Apparently, the Obama administration’s anti-terrorism policy can be summed up in two words, ‘Get lucky.’”
The GOP and conservatives as a whole ought to tread lightly here. In any war, luck plays an enormous role and to discount damn fortune is to betray ignorance of how we have scored some of our most important military victories (or staved off sure defeat) in the past. Being lucky is not necessarily a sign of poor strategy or failed leadership. Sometimes good luck is a bonus by-product of sound strategy.
But exactly how much was the failure of this latest bombing attempt due to luck and not policy? Could not the stunning incompetence demonstrated first by the so-called underwear bomber and now the Times Square dud be due to the possibility that Al Qaeda is in disarray? As predator drone strikes pummel their leadership from above and U.S. boots on the ground chase them on their own turf, they are thwarted in maintaining a coherent and unmolested organization necessary to pull off such sophisticated plots that laid waste to lower Manhattan a decade ago.
If Republicans feel the need to score points against Obama over this latest failed terror attempt, perhaps they should remind voters that candidate Obama’s rhetoric notwithstanding, President Obama seems to have very much followed the Bush model of fighting them there so they cannot harm us here. From increasing troop strength in Afghanistan to sending armed drones off on missions of assassination and mayhem on a daily basis, Obama is acting very much the warhawk that his base thought they’d sent packing in 2008. I once wrote defending Bush’s approach to terrorism and offered that his motto might be distilled to “if you only knew what we knew.” Now Obama knows too. His knee-jerk closing of Gitmo and early Apologia Americana tours seem a distant memory. And the predators are now on the prowl with a vengeance.
But here comes the ugly reality: no anti-terror protocols are full-proof, no matter how diligent. Thus it really is just a matter of time before a motivated suicide bomber detonates himself in our midst and innocent Americans die on our city streets. Instead of trying to score self-serving talking points, the political discourse would be better served by our leaders being responsible and preparing us for this eventuality. And if the GOP is not careful, it may even appear that we are rooting for a successful attack to lend merit to an anti-Obama “I told you so.” This is a terrible charge and I certainly do not believe this to be true. But truth and public perception are not always the same.
There are legitimate policy debates to be had regarding the administration’s approach to domestic terrorism. Ridiculing the impact of something so universal in the human condition as luck—especially when luck may not be as big a factor in Faisal’s failures as first perceived—is an approach that will achieve nothing but perhaps paint us as petty, partisan and maybe even worse.
medinnus // May 11, 2010 at 12:23 pm
“And if the GOP is not careful, it may even appear that we are rooting for a successful attack to lend merit to an anti-Obama “I told you so.” This is a terrible charge and I certainly do not believe this to be true. But truth and public perception are not always the same.”
That ship has already sailed, with the Limbaugh-led “We want President Obama to fail on all fronts!” charge.
“Terrible charge” or not, it didn’t stop the GOP from leveling the “You want us to lose the Iraqi War, you traitors!” bit during the Bush administration.
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 12:29 pm
Oh stop Madinnus. Limbaugh was referring to his attempt to create a quasi socialist state. I want him to fail in his efforts to push us into that failed model too.
TerryF98 // May 11, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Limbaugh was speaking within days of the election. No attempt to do anything had been proposed. He and many right wingnuts are wishing for a successful full scale attack on this country purely for political reasons.
The fact that the last two failed attacks have been a guy setting his pants on fire and a guy who could not even get the right fertilizer I would say Obama is starving the Terrorists of cash and knowledge. He is killing them over there so we don’t have to torture them over here.
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 12:46 pm
Trry. People who actually paid attention to the real Barack H. Obama during the campaign–those who did their homework beyond ‘feel-good’ heart flutters, those who knew his voting record, his past speeches, his associations, his background and the vacuous nature of his campaign–knew darned well that he was a quasi-socialist. Ulike the morons who saw hims as a blank slate upon which they could scribble all their personal hopes and dreams, we knew what he was and, shocking IS.
And I hope he fails too. You want to see success? Check out the streets of Athens.
TerryF98 // May 11, 2010 at 12:51 pm
Jeffry1
The Socialist stick is broken, please move on to Communist or Fascist. You are behind the times.
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 12:52 pm
Terry. Socialism is broken alright. Opa!
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Step right up if you want to have your tax dollars in the IMF pay for Greeks to retire at 53! Yaya socialism!
balconesfault // May 11, 2010 at 1:51 pm
Now Obama knows too. His knee-jerk closing of Gitmo and early Apologia Americana tours seem a distant memory. And the predators are now on the prowl with a vengeance.
You might consider the possibility that what the right wing mockingly calls Obama’s “Apologia Americana” tours … and even his very public declaration of an intent to close Gitmo … are as essential a portion of our strategy as predator drones and boots on the ground?
The latter are useful for attacking the already radicalized Muslims who would plot against us. But the former are essential to re-forming America’s image among non-radicalized Muslims … and the decline of the radicalized Muslims ability to put together successful attacks may well be due to them not finding the financial and logistical support that they could in the past.
An interesting question is why have these attacks been taking place now, rather than 24 months ago? Conservatives might argue it’s because terrorists perceive a weakness in Obama, and want to take advantage.
I’d argue the contrary. Because the radical Islamists real target is not to kill more Americans – it is to create more radical Islamists. And there was no better recruiting tool for radical Islam than a bull-in-a-chinashop foreign policy of Bush – kneejerk militarism, Crusade rhetoric, Abu Ghraib and Gitmo disregard for human rights, and the real threat of a US that was planning on following the PNAC plan and keeping US combat troops deployed in Iraq for decades to come.
The Obama foreign policy has replaced those with more deliberate planning of military deployments, with Obama’s public acknowledgement of Muslim grievances (what you call Apologia Americana), with a public committment to returning our handling of detainees to comply with international law, and with the US fastidiously following the Status of Forces Agreement schedule for withdrawing troops from Iraq as well as setting a time limit on the “surge” in Afghanistan.
Frankly, aside from Obama’s gamble with increased drone strikes in Afghanistan, radical Muslims have very little to use as a serious recruitment tool in a Middle East where Obama’s Presidency is viewed as a sign that America does not intend to be a permanent occupying force in the region. It is very likely that these more recent half-baked terrorism attempts are being launched specifically because Al Qaeda and the Taliban are becoming increasingly desperate.
They NEED an America to return in force with a vengeance, so that they can recruit and get more funding. These are Hail Mary passes (or whatever the Islamic equivalent would be …).
sparty // May 11, 2010 at 2:35 pm
“…knew darned well that he was a quasi-socialist…”
Uh oh. You know you’ve gotten under a wingnut’s skin when they start bringing out the cuss words.
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Hmmm sparty. “darned”? How about *bleeping*.
medinnus // May 11, 2010 at 3:15 pm
“And I hope he fails too. You want to see success?”
No, I was a McCain supporter until Palin (speaking of personality projection fantasies while ignoring the reality of political actions). If you want to put the blame in electing Obama where it belongs, try putting it on the eight years of the Bush administration and its excesses.
What I want is an effective opposition, which does not feature automatic rejectionists who obstruct everything while failing to engage and transform bad ideas into, if not good ones, then at least less-bad ones; in short, I am a Frum Conservative.
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Medinnus. First of all I will gladly blame Bush for overspending. He became a liberal on the home front and I found it sickening. And I think he cost the GOP dearly in the process by blurring the lines between the parties. It was safe for all the reagan dems. to go back because the GOP was no different. I will NOT however blame Bush for the acceleration of the overspending and expansion of the entitlement state under BHO whose new national debt will be more than the debt for the past 200 years combined in a single year.
You say you want effective opposition…agreed. The GOP voting 100% against healthcare was the first step. We need to first define who we are again and what we stand (stood?) for–even if we didn’t always succeed in deeds matching rhetoric you need that core tenet of smaller less intrusive government to work from.
The more I see Sarah Palin, the more she strikes me as rather empty save for her seemingly bottoemless reservoir of soundbites. So again I agree.
But Obama was akin to what a WSJ writer offered a while back. He is a man who took charge of a bus heading for a cliff and his response was to detonate a bomb in it. Bush has been gone for a long time…LET HIM GO. Some of our problems of residue from bad policy dating back to LBJ for pete’s sake. But many of them today are pure BHO’s making. healthcare is but one example. It is an entitlement that will destroy the treasury. But why let facts get in the way of a good ideological policy making?
balconesfault // May 11, 2010 at 4:15 pm
I will NOT however blame Bush for the acceleration of the overspending and expansion of the entitlement state under BHO whose new national debt will be more than the debt for the past 200 years combined in a single year.
Economic illiteracy of the highest order. Incoherent at best, willful lying at worst.
I’m trying to even make sense of this – if I read it literally, I guess what it means is that the debt at the end of Obama’s first year in office will be greater than the debt amassed over the previous 200 years.
Literally, that is true, since Obama ran a deficit in his first year in office … and the debt when he took office was the greatest it had ever been. By that standard, of course, under every year Bush was in office “the debt … (was) greater than the debt amassed over the previous 200 years.”
Same could also be said for Reagan, and Bush I. In fact, only Clinton could argue that he had a year when the debt … was NOT greater than the debt amassed over the previous 200 years.
Want to give that a re-try, Jeffry?
Bebe99 // May 11, 2010 at 4:59 pm
There is nothing President Obama can do that will not illicit outrage and criticism from the Republicans. Remember the troop increase in Afghanistan? Was that a good thing? No it was a failure because he took too long to make the decision. Your argument is too fine and subtle for the macho men to take seriously. I fear you are arguing with yourself.
medinnus // May 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm
@Jeffry1 – I refuse to argue on the points in which we agree. So there.
Bush in only important in two ways:
1 – His out-of-control spending.
2 – The refusal of the GOP (by and large) to admit that the policies with which he justified those spending sprees were mistaken. You cannot correct a problem until you understand it; the attempts to rehabilitate Bush are nothing more (IMO) than the denial of history.
The TPM wants to cut taxes and reduce the deficit, yet they won’t touch military spending (and the two wars that spiraled government spending out of control), Medicare (indeed, their whole thrust of anti-Obamacare was in defense of Medicare), and Social Security. You can’t get serious about taxes unless those are on the table. Everything needs to be on the table; we need to make hamburgers (and maybe chili?) out of the Sacred Cows in government spending.
The GOP try to speak to reducing the deficit, which they can’t admit their own party implemented. They blame it all on Obama, and forget Bush. That’s unjust and hypocritical, and anyone but partisan hacks know it. Until the GOP does a mea culpa, mea maxima culpa, and stops blaming Obama for everything, they sound like schoolchildren and lack credibility.
That’s why Bush is still relevant; because the GOP has to take responsibility for his eight years before they can regain fiscal credibility with anyone but their 27% party identification demographic.
Of course, the above is IMO; YMMV.
ottovbvs // May 11, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 12:46 pm
” And I hope he fails too. You want to see success? Check out the streets of Athens.”
…….still living in non sequitur land Jeffy
ottovbvs // May 11, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Jeffry1 // May 11, 2010 at 12:29 pm
“Oh stop Madinnus. Limbaugh was referring to his attempt to create a quasi socialist state. I want him to fail in his efforts to push us into that failed model too.”
……Jeffy dear child…..scarcely a day goes by when you and fellow patriots of your persuasion aren’t posting hopes that the economy is going to tank or we’re going to be attacked because this will be damaging to the president…… the fact that this will be damaging to the US or will result in the poverty, death or mutilation of American citizens is purely incidental as far as patriots like yourself are concerned……….I’ll leave you to figure out what this tells us about the extent of your patriotism not too mention your mental health.
ottovbvs // May 11, 2010 at 7:26 pm
balconesfault // May 11, 2010 at 4:15 pm
“I will NOT however blame Bush for the acceleration of the overspending and expansion of the entitlement state under BHO whose new national debt will be more than the debt for the past 200 years combined in a single year.”
…….Jeffy considers himself a financial genius having worked for years with brains of the highest intelligence on a commodity exchange but doesn’t appear to have ever heard of GAAP
Jeffry1 // May 12, 2010 at 8:44 am
Oh…it’s “Smart” (just ask him) Otto again. Hi. Just keep coming back for more don’t you. Dude, give it up. You’ve already been revealed for the psuedointellectual you are. But, why not? You amuse me as the chimps amuse Jane Goodall I suppose.
So…let’s see. The policies enacted in the first year of the Obama administration in bail-outs of the auto industry, TARP II, healthcare debacle, etc. are doubling the national debt — as the Wall Street Journal reports (granted not as respected a voice in the financial community as an old man gardening and trolling the net in his robe in his basement but still a worthy source nonetheless)” “Mr. Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents — from George Washington to George W. Bush — combined.” Other respected financial journals like Barrons also consider Obama to be a train wreck coming. Ah but what does that rag know about finance when combined with a basement troll whose online identities change more than the weather in March?
And no Otto it doesn’t take a financial genius to make money in the greatest economy the world has ever known. Just some savvy, some risk-taking and luck never hurts. But only a financial genius picks the absolute bottom of the most volatile and violent crash of the stock market since 1929—and that of course was brilliant you remember?
Otto Otto Otto…you are so transparanetly and intellectually vaccuous it is astounding that you are so pompous at the same time. Why? What have you really achieved to justify such self-inflation? And anyone who supports a multi-trillion dollar entitlement program while the country is mired in debt and we are seeing the unwravelling of the socialist model overseas (like it or not you cannot spend 1.5 for every 1 you take in ad infinitum–even YOU understand that, don’t you?), any one justifies his unbridled and irrational faith in this new program’s fiscal viability by offering up adherence to garbage-in-garbage-out CBO numbers based on unrealistic and alreadyrecanted assumptions, and then cannot provide for me a singel example of ONE “government entitlement program that came in at or under budget (still after moths of my asking) to show some justification for said faith grounded in the factual record demonstrates that he is, in layman’s (like me) terms…a megafool. An educated fool perhaps…but in the end just a fool with a degree nonetheless. There are millions of you roaming the earth. You call yourselves “brights” or whatever–we call you “marks.” And you do little good for those of us who understand how that pesky REAL world works other than provide for them comic relief like now.
As for me wishing Obama to fail as a measure of patriotism…again you cannot be this dense. (Ideologically blind perhaps but we already know this). I do not consider the country to fail if policies that will in my belief destroy that country fail to gain traction. I also want a doctor who tries to inject in me a poison thinkin it is cure to fail in his attempt–it does not mean I wish my body harm–quite the opposite. So, absolutely I wanted Healthcare to FAIL to pass because it will ruin the country (Opa!). I wanted the GM bailout to FAIL because concerns should be allowed to fail — especially when it is but a gift to greedy and inert union bosses. I wanted his bloated budget to FAIL to pass because it creates an unsustainable fiscal path. Only an ideologue views passing Obama’s agenda and success for the country as synonomous. Seriously are you really THIS dull?
As to Greece and the US…time will tell. Arguments can be made on both sides as to whether Athens and Washington are congruent. I believe that mistakes, though never repeated exactly, have infinite cousins. I believe the anaolgy is sound. Of course I have a secret weapon. I have something here that you do not have–or probably do but ideological stubborniness (foolish blindness) prevents you from using it. It’s called a pocket calculator. Try this exercise: Add 1, subtract 1.5 and keep doing that. What happens? It isn’t rocket science. Maybe that is the problem. William of Occam and you are poles apart.
Finally, again your disdain for floor traders is only surpassed by your absolute and complete ignorance of what they do. And I will say this: the dumbest successful floor trader is smarter than you will ever be. They take more risks in an afternoon than a slug like you takes his whole life. And they know what it is like to not just talk the talk of conviction but walk the walk by putting their money and futures on the line. You should try it some time old man before you die. Hell, their taxes are probably funding your pathetically lonely retirement. Come down to the CME or Nymex or Comex or Amex some day with your checkbook. The dumb guys there would LOVE to see you and learn from a real brain like you.
There is nothing worse than an educated derelict. Again, you are sooo commonplace it is pathetic. Have a good day gardener.
Slide // May 12, 2010 at 9:39 am
Jeffry, perhaps you had some good points in your post but quite frankly all I heard was your insults and vicious attacks. Typical right wing manner of debate. Let me ask everyone, would you put much weight in the arguments of someone that needed to include these following comments:
The collected wit and wisdom of the great and wonderous Jeffry1:
Oh…it’s “Smart” (just ask him) Otto again
You’ve already been revealed for the psuedointellectual [sic] you are
You amuse me as the chimps amuse Jane Goodall I suppose.
an old man gardening and trolling the net in his robe in his basement
a basement troll whose online identities change more than the weather in March?
you are so transparanetly [sic] and intellectually vaccuous [sic] it is astounding that you are so pompous at the same time
There are millions of you roaming the earth. You call yourselves “brights” or whatever–we call you “marks.”
Seriously are you really THIS dull?
your absolute and complete ignorance
a slug like you
You should try it some time old man before you die.
The dumb guys there would LOVE to see you and learn from a real brain like you.
an educated derelict.
Have a good day gardener.
—————————————————————–
whew…. quite an intellectual argument you made there Jeffry1
Jeffry1 // May 12, 2010 at 10:21 am
YOu’re right of course slide. Perhaps I should have elevated the debate to such levels as this: “Jeffy dear child…..scarcely a day goes by when you and fellow patriots of your persuasion aren’t posting hopes that the economy is going to tank” or this intellectual gem: “death or mutilation of American citizens is purely incidental as far as patriots like yourself are concerned” How about this? “I’ll leave you to figure out what this tells us about the extent of your patriotism not too mention your mental health.”
Or do you proose this line of Otoo electaed discourse: “…….Jeffy considers himself a financial genius having worked for years with brains of the highest intelligence on a commodity exchange.”
Some times to fight a sewer rat, you have to get down into the sewer. You DID read the posts to which I was responding to right?
Jeffry1 // May 12, 2010 at 10:22 am
Slide…try to talk to Otto for a bit. I’ll be pulling you off him in about ten posts. LOL. It IS fun though as I said.
balconesfault // May 12, 2010 at 10:49 am
The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public
First, this is inaccurate. The public debt on the day Obama took office was 6.3 trillion dollars. I am very interested in seeing how a 3.9 trillion dollar budget would more than double that.
Second, it is misleading – because the whole term “public debt” that has now come into vogue by right wingers when discussing the deficit implies that money borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund is not owed to the public – it presupposes that the Federal Government has always had the right to reneg on that committment.
In real terms, the total public debt outstanding on the day Obama took office was 10.6 trillion dollars. Yes – one year later it was 12.3 trillion – quite an increase – 1.7 trillion.
Just for shits and grins, however, let’s look at the total public debt outstanding 1 year before GW Bush left office. The total public debt outstanding stood at 9.2 trillion. What was the increase in total public debt outstanding over Bush’s last year in office? 1.4 trillion.
What was the increase in total public debt outstanding over Bush’s last 4 months in office?
It jumped from 9.7 trillion, to 10.6 trillion. Yes, Obama inherited a federal debt that was growing at an annual rate of 2.7 trillion dollars per year over Bush’s last 4 months in office.
So the Wall Street Journal combines factual errancy with willfully misleading numbers.
What a shock for a Rupert Murdoch owned enterprise!