I am confused.
In an earlier Nemski thread, Donviti and Anonone were critical of President Obama’s response to the attempted Flaming Crotch terrorist attack. I have to ask, do both want Obama to be more like George W. Bush in his response to terrorism? Now, both had been attacking Obama from the left as a result of the healthcare bill not being progressive enough. Indeed, I suspect, but I am not sure, that both have also criticized Obama from the left for failing to prosecute Bush Administration officials for war crimes, for continuing military tribunals, for not ending Don’t Ask Don’t Tell immediately, etc. Now, I share their frustration on all of the latter issues, but I understand why compromises were made or actions were not yet taken. What I do not understand, is how Anonone and Donviti now appear to be supporters or the Bush-Cheney Neocon PANIC reaction to terrorism.
During the Bush years, administration officials viewed incidents like these as opportunities to exploit. Often, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Ashcroft, and Ridge would find the nearest camera and fan the flames of panic and fear. If Bush were President right now, or Palin, or McCain, or Cheney, they would all use this attempted terrorist attack as a rationale for the invasion of Yemen and perhaps, Amsterdam. It would definitely be an opportunity to panic the nation into a state of fear, for when the populace is afraid it is more controllable, a hallmark of fascism. And if anyone criticized the Administration response as “fear mongering,” they would be called traitors, or at least be accused of “aiding and abetting” terrorists by attacking the Commander in Chief in the wake of a crisis.
Now, Donviti recently traveled to Amsterdam, so perhaps he has gained some insight into the Netherland’s defenses and thinks that Obama should attack now so that our soldiers could gain access to legal hemp and prostitution, as well as their beer.
But the prevailing liberal and Democratic view, and the view of both candidate Obama and President Obama, is what Marc Ambinder described in his column published earlier today which Nemski linked to:
Authorities respond appropriately; the President (as this president is want to do) presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his Secretary of Homeland Security.
But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. […]
Let the authorities do their work. Don’t presume; don’t panic the country; don’t chest-thump, prejudge, interfere, politicize (in an international sense), don’t give Al Qaeda (or whomever) a symbolic victory; resist the urge to open the old playbook and run a familiar play.
This is what Obama’s base wanted when we voted for him, Donviti: a different approach to responding to terrorism. It is what you used to want as well, before you figured out you could be more bombastic in opposing Obama on all things rather than actually thinking about the issues. It is either that, or a clear cut example of Obama Derangement Syndrome taking hold.
In fact, this low key no panic approach to fighting terrorism is working. The Obama administration has taken out Saleh al-Somali, Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, and Baitullah Mehsud, while taking suspected terrorists Najibullah Zazi, Talib Islam, and Hosam Maher Husein Smadi into custody before they could launch potential attacks. We have no heard much about these successes, under the deliberate Obama Administration strategy of not giving airtime to terrorists and not panicking the public into a state of fear.
Now, perhaps Anonone and Donviti will correct me, and state that on this one issue, Obama is doing what he said he would do. But I sense that since Obama has disappointed Donviti and Anonone on some issues, it means Obama is wrong on all issues, and it means that we have to return to the Bush years where terrorism is concerned.
Hey everybody! Let’s all light our hair on fire and run around screaming! Another conventional plane bombing, of the sort that has been going on for decades, has failed. But now, let’s get especially crazy about it!
I was quite specific in my criticism. Obomba IS responding to Terrorism in the SAME WAY Bush responded. He’s playing golf on vacation while our civil liberties and freedoms are eroded. I wrote:
“Yes Obomba golfs while TSA continues implementing meaningless “security measures” to slowly erode our civili rights. Eventually, flying naked in leg irons and handcuffs will be the accepted norm.”
So we still have all of Bush’s dumb terror stuff like the level of threat colors and Obomba stands by as the TSA is takes away even more freedoms for NOTHING (like going to the bathroom during a flight or reading a book or working on a laptop). But hey, gradual erosion of civil rights and freedom under Obomba must be A-OK ’cause he’s a Democrat.
And woe to anybody who criticizes Obomba for his lack of liberalism on a website called “Delaware Liberal.”
Bring it on, Del Dem. I’ll un-confuse you.
Right now those security measures are for passengers inbound to the US. Right now, those increased security measures are in lieu of shutting down these systems as BushCo used to do. Right now, these security measures are in place while people figure out what happened in the Amsterdam screening that let this guy get on a plane. Much of the current security business is theater, but I don’t begrudge them taking some additional measures until they know what happened at the screening and until they are clear that this guy was a lone actor, not part of a larger plot.
They used to make you sit still for the hour during the approach to DC airports for awhile after 9/11. You don’t do that any more.
If that is true, Anonone, then you are the one who is confused. You should be praising Obama. He is most definitely not behaving or acting like Bush when it comes to responding to terrorism, as I have shown.
Bush only shut down air travel after 9/11.
I guess I should begin to expect cassandra_m to start to side with the government every time they take away more and more of our basic freedoms. And Del Dem, too.
So wait… you wanted Obama to drop everything and panic, but do nothing. In fact, you want him to reduce travel restrictions.
Obama Derangement Syndrome.
None of you liberals have a clue about air travel or security.
Mike Protack
And you have no clue about politics or government.
Delaware Dem
I guess I should begin to expect cassandra_m to start to side with the government every time they take away more and more of our basic freedoms.
I suppose you can expect anything you like. But will point out that this is the process of making “enemies” of people who are supposed to be on your side and will note for the record that I did not start this.
I do expect the government to protect me from these idiots. And I don’t expect them to run off half-cocked — like BushCo did. Altho to their credit, the secondary screening business went away as did the lockdown on the DC approach.
After Richard Reid and after the Heathrow events, international travel was slowed down substantially as passenger lists were re-screened and new security measures implemented. It took a couple of weeks for it to recover. As of now — delays in travel are of a few hours only as security agencies everywhere are better equipped to implement new procedures.
And to steal an argument, no one HAS to fly. So you are always free to avoid any security measures you please by staying off of airplanes.
I will save you from your conundrum:
but I understand why compromises were made or actions were not yet taken. What I do not understand, is how Anonone and Donviti now appear to be supporters or the Bush-Cheney Neocon PANIC reaction to terrorism.
hardly and my comments weren’t related to the post at all. I felt like flaming a little prior to the Eagles game 🙂
I think O’s response was legitimate. Some retard lights his balls on fire hardly requires O to step out on a pile of rubble with a megaphone and say we are going to smoke this guy out of his cave.
besides all that, my comment was directed towards UI’s comment that started the entire thread. I openly admit I hijacked the thread.
good post too, but you could have linked to my awesome blog!
cassandra_m wrote: “And to steal an argument, no one HAS to fly.”
And nobody HAS to talk on the phone, so if you don’t want the government listening…
And nobody HAS to use a bank, so if you don’t want the government tracking your spending…
And nobody HAS to walk on the sidewalk, so if you don’t want the government frisking you…
I never knew what a supporter of totalitarianism you were, cassandra_m. In your world, the government can do no wrong as it takes away our liberties, one by one by one…
anonone wrote I never knew what a supporter of totalitarianism you were, cassandra_m. In your world, the government can do no wrong as it takes away our liberties, one by one by one…
That’s the second most stoopidest thing you’ve written on this blog.
Indeed. A1 was just invoking this same argument over auto insurance — that it wasn’t an infringement on your rights since you could CHOOSE not to drive. Funny how he didn’t see himself as a supporter of totalitarianism then.
Also funny how he addressed no real points in my own post — just the argument that I stole from him.
Mike Protack wrote None of you liberals have a clue about air travel or security.
Mike, what are your thoughts about the recent airline security issues?
Um, cassandra_m, I know it takes some time to understand what somebody has actually written, but you might try it.
I did not mention your idiotic driving insurance argument – I mentioned talking on the phone, using a bank, and walking on the side walk: none of these activities require a license.
There are lots of countries in this world where the government infringes on basic civil liberties and freedoms with nary a protest, thanks to willing and gullible people like you who think have no problem giving up liberty for a false sense of security.
“Four legs good, two legs better,” right, cassandra_m?
This isn’t a very good dance away from your own damn argument, A1.
But I do note that you’ve reserved the facile and silly arguments to your own singular use.
And still no attempt to even address my points, but continuing to attribute motivations or thinking to me that you’ve no clue over. And here I am, right here, and you could ask. But no worries, I imagine that someone will be here shortly to note how I’m someone responsible for making you an enemy or some other BS.
Janet has a different take. She has faith in the system.
“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated that “the system worked.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html?showall
In your own words, cassandra_m:
“Much of the current security business is theater, but I don’t begrudge them taking some additional measures until they know what happened…”
You don’t “begrudge” the government taking away people’s freedom and liberty even, as you admit: “Much of the current security business is theater.”
Well, I do begrudge the government a lot for doing that because I happen to take personal freedom, liberty, and civil rights seriously and I am not about to have them taken from us by people like you who, in your own words, clearly don’t care.
“Bush only shut down air travel after 9/11.”
No, actually, he only looked clueless at a bunch of school kids and asked his peeps what he should do.
Sheesh – there are a lot of people here that drank the Kool Aid…
I think an underlying issue on this site is the contributors ability to now trust government more than they did under Bush.
Fatal Error. We elected him b/c we didn’t trust the last guy, now we automatically trust the new guy sight unseen? I’m perplexed that this amount of trust can be handed over after what happened the last 8 years
Gee, thanks for that prescient observation.
Obama kills innocent civilians just like the last guy(see recent village bombing in Yemen). See, he is no different than Bush.
I’m not taking off my pants to get on an airplane.
And we are all happy for that, G Rex. 😉
Particularly if you’re not allowed to have anything in your lap.