Do the ACLU and privacy activists share the blame for Christmas Day attack?

posted at 9:30 am on December 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The impulse of the Obama administration since the Christmas Day terrorist attack on Northwest 253 has so far been to blame the Bush administration for setting rules on the additions of terrorist suspects to the no-fly list from the TIDE database.  Never mind, for the moment, that the Obama administration has been in office for almost a full year and 25% of its term in office, and that they promised to “hit the ground running,” not to take a year to get to speed on national security.  Those rules didn’t just get generated by the previous White House in a vacuum, or arbitrarily, as Gabriel Schoenfeld reminds readers of the Los Angeles Times:

The Bush administration was subjected to withering criticism for the way it managed the no-fly list. The American Civil Liberties Union put the system on its own list of the “Top Ten Abuses of Power Since 9/11,” asserting that “the uncontroversial contention that Osama bin Laden and a handful of other known terrorists should not be allowed on an aircraft” has been exploited “to create a monster.” In one of several lawsuits the group has filed involving terrorist lists, the ACLU alleged that they “violate airline passengers’ constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and to due process of law.”

Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has been one among a chorus of voices that accused the former administration of being far too sweeping, placing “infants, nuns and even members of Congress” on terrorist watch lists. The writer Naomi Wolf has called travel restrictions such as the no-fly list, “a classic part of the fascist playbook” akin to the depredations of Nazi Germany, where “families fleeing internment were traumatized by the uncertainties that they knew they faced at the borders.” This was hysteria directed against Bush counter-terrorism mechanisms that the Obama administration has left almost entirely unchanged.

The Department of Homeland Security has indeed received a high volume of complaints about airport screening by individuals attempting to travel. Yet only a minuscule 0.7% of the complaints stemmed from issues relating to the watch lists. And of that 0.7%, about 51% of the complaints led to the conclusion that the individual in question was appropriately on the watch list. Whatever problems exist, the system is not outrageously over-inclusive. Indeed, if anything, the opposite is the case.

We will never know whether fierce criticism from the left had any direct effect on the processing of Abdulmutallab’s file, but the political environment is important to consider going forward. The officials managing the watch lists are not eager to be hauled before a congressional committee if they blunder and bar innocent people from getting on flights. But they are also acutely aware of the potential price tag of being under-inclusive.

Generally speaking, when talking about the tension between government and civil libertarians, I tend to side more with the latter in most cases.  That may be more true now than ever, when the federal government seeks breathtaking advances in power over people’s lives through greater control of the health-care system and energy production.  Since Democrats took over Congress and the White House, more and more conservatives have discovered their inner libertarians — and that civil-libertarian impulse should be encouraged.

However, this is one area in which Schoenfeld is correct to call the no-fly list critics “extremist.”  The danger of terrorist attacks on our air travel is all too real, as 9/11 proved and the latest attempt corroborates.  The main constitutional role of the federal government is to secure the nation against attack, and no one doubts that air travel with its interstate and international nature belongs in their jurisdiction for law enforcement and counterterrorism.  They have the responsibility to make sure we know who represents a danger to Americans traveling by air and to prevent them from getting onto airplanes before they attack.  Once the attack takes place, it’s generally too late to do anything about it; we just got lucky last week.

Do mistakes get made?  Of course, but it’s time we stopped making the perfect the enemy of the good.  As long as we have some due process in place to rectify those mistakes and we make that process as transparent as it can be, then we should understand that it’s better to miss a flight than to allow an Umar Abdulmutallab onto an inbound flight from Amsterdam.  We shouldn’t insist that we get more derogatory information before canceling a visa or moving someone to the no-fly list when his own father — a prominent Nigerian politician and banker — tells us that his son has become a radical Islamist jihadist who wants to attack the US.

If Janet Napolitano wants to blame the rules surrounding the no-fly listings for the attack, then she should blame the people who forced those rules into place — many of whom were the people who supported her boss in the last election.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Is the Pope Catholic? Does a bear sh!t in the woods?

James on December 29, 2009 at 9:33 AM

The blame goes first to the PC police who have prevented profiling along the lines that has made El Al the safest airline in the world.

petefrt on December 29, 2009 at 9:33 AM

No, the jihadist who carried out is. Was the pro-life movement responsible for Eric Rudolph?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:34 AM

Andrew McCarthy’s comments this morning are also, as always, worth reading:

It would be nice if, after eight years, the ACLU could explain how exactly a Nigerian national boarding an aircraft in Nigeria, or Amsterdam, has an American “constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and to due process of law.” Even when the Constitution does apply, moreover, the Fourth Amendment bars only unreasonable searches, and due process is merely the process that is due under the circumstances — so: How are anybody’s rights violated by stepped up security measures during wartime when we know, after several incidents, the enemy’s strategy includes both attacking aircraft and using planes as weapons?

I’m not making an argument for stupid security measures — e.g., waving wands over 80-year-old nuns so you can justify patting down the Flying Imams. But no-fly lists for terror suspects are eminently sensible, and “stupid,” in any event, is not unconstitutional.

Drained Brain on December 29, 2009 at 9:35 AM

If Janet Napolitano wants to blame the rules surrounding the no-fly listings for the attack, then she should blame the people who forced those rules into place — many of whom were the people who supported her boss in the last election

If I were suicidal, I’d hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

VelvetElvis on December 29, 2009 at 9:36 AM

It should be noted that the libs have got us exactly where they want us. Pointing fingers at each other every time something like this happens instead of focusing on what should be a common enemy.

LibTired on December 29, 2009 at 9:39 AM

They said they would “hit the ground running”, but they never said which direction they would run in….

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:42 AM

We will never know whether fierce criticism from the left had any direct effect on the processing of Abdulmutallab’s file,

…but that won’t stop us from using it as a cheap excuse to attack Obama….

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Common sense.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then a proper assumption can be made that it is indeed a duck.

Checking out every cow, horse, cat and dog, whilst looking for that duck makes no sense at all.

El Al has it right. Why can’t we?

coldwarrior on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

I have a suggestion for these assclowns who are playing this merry Blame Game of theirs:

CAN IT! NOW!

Instead, concentrate on insuring that the next time some bunch of nutcases try to bring something of an explosive nature on board a fully seated aircraft that procedures are in place that will insure that they don’t even make it past the first checkpoint!

pilamaye on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Do the ACLU and privacy activists share the blame for Christmas Day Winter Solstice attack?

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:44 AM

Do the ACLU and privacy activists share the blame for Christmas Day attack?

Didn’t people wait days for Messiah to speak up and tell everybody it was an “alleged” Christmas Day attack?

Marcus on December 29, 2009 at 9:44 AM

…but that won’t stop us from using it as a cheap excuse to attack Obama….

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Not everything of value comes with a high price…

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM

It’s not just about the system. It’s about the people in charge. Obama thinks the terrorists have a point. Obama thinks America is evil, at least until he was elected. This is about him.

JellyToast on December 29, 2009 at 9:46 AM

Politicizing National Security, which is what the Left is all about, is what got us to this point. They are scum for it, anything to make Bush unpopular…

Just a matter of time till another 9/11 happens.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 9:47 AM

It’s not just about the system. It’s about the people in charge. Obama thinks the terrorists have a point. Obama thinks America is evil, at least until he was elected. This is about him.

JellyToast on December 29, 2009 at 9:46 AM

the Paultards, trying to takeover the GOP, beleive the exact same thing.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 9:48 AM

Politicizing National Security

You mean DeMint blocking the nomination of the head of the TSA since September? Because he hates unions?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:49 AM

Obama thinks the terrorists have a point. Obama thinks America is evil, at least until he was elected.

Ok, Alex Jones.

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:49 AM

Well it’s the worst of both worlds, isn’t it? The no-fly list exists for the ACLU, Ron Paul etc. to complain about but the jihaids on the no-fly list are not actually prevented from flying. What sort of a mad compromise is that?

aengus on December 29, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Seems like they hit the golf course before the ground.

JammieWearingFool on December 29, 2009 at 9:50 AM

I wonder if they think an Underwear Bomb may be what took down the Air France flight from Brazil last year now???

remember that, all we officially know is the Plane suddenly blew up in the air over the Atlantic

jp on December 29, 2009 at 9:51 AM

I blame islam.

SouthernGent on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

Was the pro-life movement responsible for Eric Rudolph?

In the minds of liberals, yes, we were. Just as we all were responsible for the death of George Tiller.

The left never, ever takes responsibility for their actions. All that matters is how things feel. Whether or not their ideas “feel” good is more important than whether or not those ideas yield effective, provable results.

So politically correct safety policies for airlines make the PC crowd feel really, really good.

“We’re not racially profiling!” they claim. “Look how tolerant and compassionate we are! Look how progressive we can be!”

Then when someone like Abdulmutallab gets past security and nearly kills hundreds of innocent people, the fact their policies made it possible means nothing. It’s time to play the “Blame Bush” or “Spin! Spin! Spin!” cards to absolve themselves of any responsibility.

I’ve said it elsewhere, but it bears repeating here:

A terror attack on American soil that costs American lives will be the nail in the coffin of the Obama administration. No amount of spin, no amount of favorable media coverage, no number of pretty speeches, no screaming “Blame Bush!” will relinquish Obama’s culpability. He will be held responsible for failing in his duties as Commander in Chief.

And I hope every conservative worth his salt works to remind the American public of that sad fact between now and 2012.

englishqueen01 on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

I\’m with you Ed;I\’ve connected with my inner libertarian this year. But I still have problem with the civil lberties absolutists when it comes to national security. In WWII, the FBI could open any mail or telegrams it wanted without a warrant, and the government rounded up citizens and out them in camps based on ethnicity. I don\’t think we ever need to go that far again, but since WWII, we\’ve let all kinds of foreign subversives do pretty much whatever they want to, with Soviet spies infiltrating our institutions at the highest levels, and now murderous fanatics getting promoted to Major in the Army and palling around with future presidents.

There\’s always going to be a tension between security and liberty, so as you say, lets have security with oversight and the means to rectify transgressions.

juliesa on December 29, 2009 at 9:54 AM

You mean DeMint blocking the nomination of the head of the TSA since September? Because he hates unions?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:49 AM

No, because as this shows, government unions are useless…you (and your jihadist friend) just proved the point.

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:54 AM

I guess we shall have to defer to the collective intelligence of people who DON’T WANT TO DIE as trumping all the collective intelligence of the US Congress, the FBI, CIA, the ACLU and CAIR.

Joan of Argghh on December 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM

Holy crap, grow fins the Democrat says the terrorist’s accomplices should get a free pass. That’s a queer view even by Democrat standards.

Libs are unfit to lead. See you in 2010.

jeff_from_mpls on December 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:34 AM

Ha, ha, ha. Keep spinning.

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM

I blame islam.

SouthernGent on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

… and the Prophet Mohammed. (fbuh)

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 9:56 AM

The blame goes first to the PC police who have prevented profiling along the lines that has made El Al the safest airline in the world.

petefrt on December 29, 2009 at 9:33 AM

As I said to Ed Morrissey before a few days ago there may be a case to be made for ethnic profiling but that is not the issue in this instance. The guy was already on the terrorist watch list. He tried to board without a passport. El Al is the safest airline in the world because, unlike the US authorities, they don’t allow terrorists to board planes, not because they have better methods for determining who is or is not a terrorist.

aengus on December 29, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Ed, you’re off in the weeds… AGAIN

So now you want to help the bureaucrats destroy the last vestiges of privacy in America. What’s the matter Ed, don’t you fly any more?

Of course its asinine to grant U.S. Constitutional Rights to foreign nationals, especially on their own soil. That’s as stupid as giving non-state actors protections under the Geneva Conventions.

But the Wholesale Destruction of Freedom doesn’t make anyone safer.

The bureaucrats will do anything they can to avoid going after the bad individuals who make up these networks.

This game isn’t about protecting America or Americans, its about increasing the scope and power of bureaucrats therefore, there is interest in “sweeping” changes, and very little interest in focused hard work.

And you Ed, prattle along helping them. You’re better than that, see if you can figure it out and start saying the right things for a change.

CrazyGene on December 29, 2009 at 9:56 AM

I blame islam.

SouthernGent on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

Yep. And the individual. Sure we have a fine line to walk with the advent of new (intrusive) technology alongside threats to our safety, but, the “blame” lies with the perpetrator and the death cult he’s a member of.

Diane on December 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM

A terror attack on American soil that costs American lives will be the nail in the coffin of the Obama administration. No amount of spin, no amount of favorable media coverage, no number of pretty speeches, no screaming “Blame Bush!” will relinquish Obama’s culpability. He will be held responsible for failing in his duties as Commander in Chief.

englishqueen01 on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

We already had one-Ft. Hood. That was Bush’s fault too.

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Team Hopey,and Team Liberal,do not want the word terrorist,
or Muslim Jihadys,even uttered,no how,way,shape or form!

After all,Liberal Politics and its Socialist Engineering
goals are paramount,and are of top priority!!

So,Terrorism attacks are a distraction to the Lefty
agenda and over all goals,and politics will always
trump America,and terrorism!!!

canopfor on December 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM

The left never, ever takes responsibility for their actions.
englishqueen01 on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

Harlan James Drake…a good example…

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM

accused the former administration of being far too sweeping, placing “infants, nuns and even members of Congress” on terrorist watch lists

This was done to ensure the federal government was not accused of discrimination.

WashJeff on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Just a matter of time till another 9/11 happens.

And the blood will be on the hands of Obama and His ilk. I, for one, will not rally behind that SOB. In this case, we as a nation deserve whatever we get for putting someone like that in a position of power.

pdigaudio on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

It’s like Christmas came on time for you guys this year. A terror attempt so you could starting blaming everyone on the left: Obama, Napolitano, Clinton, The ACLU,… I’m just waiting for you guys to figure out how to blame ACORN. You know it’s coming.

And, again, Gibbs was not blaming Bush. He was providing some context for those right-wing critics who were inevitably going to blame Obama and his “weak-on-terror” policies for this.

But, again, Merry Christmas. Just what you wanted: a terror attempt to politicize!

Tom_Shipley on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Yes. The only legitimate meaning for the acronym “PC” is Partly Cloudy.

As used by government, Political Correctness (PC) means only Government can identify what is correct; politically, culturally, morally, economically, etc. as determined by a politician, not U.S..

Thus, researching when the term became part of the lexicon will show U.S. that the government intentionally means to exercise absolute control over what we think, say, or write, violating the First Amendment the left so often claim as their guiding principal for how the rest of U.S. will live.

Totally, totalitarian from my prespective.

MSGTAS on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

A terror attack on American soil that costs American lives will be the nail in the coffin of the Obama administration. No amount of spin, no amount of favorable media coverage, no number of pretty speeches, no screaming “Blame Bush!” will relinquish Obama’s culpability. He will be held responsible for failing in his duties as Commander in Chief.

And I hope every conservative worth his salt works to remind the American public of that sad fact between now and 2012.

englishqueen01 on December 29, 2009 at 9:53 AM

With all due respect your Majesty, but Ft. Hood has been washed away.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 9:59 AM

I’m not making an argument for stupid security measures — e.g., waving wands over 80-year-old nuns so you can justify patting down the Flying Imams. But no-fly lists for terror suspects are eminently sensible, and “stupid,” in any event, is not unconstitutional

Why is that stupid? I think it stupid to believe that everybody walking through an airport dressed like a nun must be a nun. I think it stupid to have specific categories of “People Who Look Trustworthy And So Should Be Spared A Harmless Hassle” and then expect Al Qaeda to respect the gaping security hole you tore for them to exploit.

Airport Security may seem a pain in the ass but I’m sure it’s preferrable to tumbling 20,000 feet into a cornfield with your clothes on fire, which is the alternative.

(Furthermore as a Catholic I know there’s probably several hundred nuns in the US who support ‘radical action’ against property and a few dozen who’d actively help, if you could find them, but arguing against a particular definition of a security MVP digresses from denouncing the idea of security MVPs).

Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM

…but that won’t stop us from using it as a cheap excuse to attack Obama….

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Not everything of value comes with a high price…

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM

And Grow Fish comes as cheap as there is..

lovingmyUSA on December 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM

Pointing fingers at each other every time something like this happens instead of focusing on what should be a common enemy.

LibTired on December 29, 2009 at 9:39 AM

Bingo. I’m so sick and tired of hearing about the inherited problems this administration faces. If you aren’t up to the task, resign. Please. You’re the one who stood there and promised people you’d make things better, not whine about the past. If you want to appear like a coward, stand up and say it wasn’t your fault. If you want to appear strong say something bold to the enemy instead. This was not an “isolated” incident. THESE PEOPLE WANT TO KILL US AND ARE THINKING OF WAYS TO DO IT EVERY SINGLE DAY. Don’t tell the people in Iran that we’re with you without telling them that their leaders WILL NO LONGER BE RECOGNIZED. We don’t need wishy washiness, we need BOLD LEADERSHIP. Sorry we interrupted your vacation with these pesky little issues, go back to your golf game.

scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 10:01 AM

Ron Paul going off the Deep End again, apparently he was also on Larry King and Ben Stein called him an Anti-Semite

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/45663.html

dishonest crackpot

Using far-left nut, Robert Pape, with the sole claim that the US creates Terrorism and if we simply isolate ourselves militarily they will suddenly become rabid Free Traders, Love us to death and reject Sharia Law?

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:02 AM

right2bright

What do govt unions have to do with protecting the nation. DeMint’s to blame for politicizing our security to begin with. And you flying monkeys just do his bidding. Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

It’s like Christmas came on time for you guys this year. A terror attempt so you could starting blaming everyone on the left: Obama, Napolitano, Clinton, The ACLU,… I’m just waiting for you guys to figure out how to blame ACORN. You know it’s coming.

And, again, Gibbs was not blaming Bush. He was providing some context for those right-wing critics who were inevitably going to blame Obama and his “weak-on-terror” policies for this.

Tom_Shipley on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

I guess you can include Napolitano in that, for suggesting the system failed. Curse her, the right-wing harpy!

Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

No, the jihadist who carried out is. Was the pro-life movement responsible for Eric Rudolph?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:34 AM

…but that won’t stop us from using it as a cheap excuse to attack Obama….

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Ultimately the terrorists are responsible for their own actions (good to see a liberal actually say that). However, when the Executive branch tries to formulate a policy to combat and stop these terrorists then ‘we’ become responsible for that response. Lefty organizations like the ACLU have tried to make it as difficult as possible for our country to defend itself – and they bear responsibility for hampering our defense.

gwelf on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Just what you wanted: a terror attempt to politicize!

Well there was the attack on Fort Dix which was arguably a direct consequence of President Bush’s open borders policy – some of the terrorists came in illegaly through Mexico. But the fact is that in this case the left is to blame and Napolitano in particular is deserving of total contempt.

aengus on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Bingo. I’m so sick and tired of hearing about the inherited problems this administration faces.

Because it’s true and it undermines your Obama-is-a-Muslim-Manchurian-candidate meme?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

because you have to be an adult and accept responsibility

blatantblue on December 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Btw,after the Historical 24/7/362 days of Obamas gaffes,and
screw-up,and the media orgasmicaly following every second
of Obama,and,

Jihadys, have been planning for over a year,as Liberal
America was focused on the Obama NeverEnding soap opera,

and just like the run up to 911 with Clinton 24/7 Bimbo
Eruptions,the Jihadys were planning and attacked,

well guess what,its another Liberal Administration,and its
Part Deux,DejaVu all over again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on December 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

You mean DeMint blocking the nomination of the head of the TSA since September? Because he hates unions?

How would unionizing the TSA help protect American citizens?
I don’t think ANY federal employee should be in a union. That is a side issue though.

It has to be the height of hypocracy to use a no-fly list as a political weapon against Bush to show how “fascist” he was and then blame Bush’s rules when someone who should have been on that very same list attempts to blow up an airplane over US soil. If a no-fly list is such a bad thing it should have been abolished outright. Instead it looks like it has just been allowed to wither on the vine for the last year.

Mord on December 29, 2009 at 10:06 AM

It’s like Christmas came on time for you guys this year. A terror attempt so you could starting blaming everyone on the left: Obama, Napolitano, Clinton, The ACLU,… I’m just waiting for you guys to figure out how to blame ACORN. You know it’s coming.

And, again, Gibbs was not blaming Bush. He was providing some context for those right-wing critics who were inevitably going to blame Obama and his “weak-on-terror” policies for this.

But, again, Merry Christmas. Just what you wanted: a terror attempt to politicize!

Tom_Shipley on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

I guess you weren’t around yesterday when we were talking about how Bush failed (but pleased the left) by releasing 2 Gitmo detainees who helped plan this/other attacks.

gwelf on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Ultimately the terrorists are responsible for their own actions (good to see a liberal actually say that).

Thats only for rhetorical politics, they actually beleive:

1) America is at fault for creating Terrorist via “US Imperialism”

2) Same logic applies to Criminals, Society makes them do these things therefor let them out of jail.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

This about airline security and I believe that the owners of the airlines should be allowed to do whatever they deem necessary to keep their customers safe. Flying on someone elses airline is a priviledge and not a right. If one dislikes the measures that a certain airline uses to keep it’s passengers safe you are free to seek other transportation options. No one has a right to tell person or company responsible for other human lives that you disagree with the methods in which they have determined will keep their customers safe. If you don’t like it buses, trains and automobiles are still available to you.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Because it’s true and it undermines your Obama-is-a-Muslim-Manchurian-candidate meme?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Ooh, ooh I like this game!

Bush inherited a crumbling/bubble-popping economy from Clinton and the 9/11 attacks were planned and put into action during the Clinton administration (Clinton also failed to apprehend Osama bin Laden when he had the chance) and the security framework created by Clinton failed to detect/stop the attacks.

gwelf on December 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM

…but that won’t stop us from using it as a cheap excuse to attack Obama….

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Watching libs for the last 30 or so years must have rubbed off on us, eh?

Patrick S on December 29, 2009 at 10:11 AM

And, again, Gibbs was not blaming Bush. He was providing some context for those right-wing critics who were inevitably going to blame Obama and his “weak-on-terror” policies for this.

Tom_Shipley on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Didn’t you post yesterday that Janet was stating that the system was working “after” the hijacking and was not referring to what transpired before…then I linked where she definitely stated opposite of you, that the system worked with the passengers, etc. (basically depending on passengers to be air marshall’s)…and you ignored the facts, and still think the “system” worked?
The answer is yes, you did…you posted a remark made after she was caught being so foolish, and she tried to lie her way out of it…but then you support that sort of thing.

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 10:11 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Oh, come on. Grow some balls, say what you really want to say and get yourself banned. Or are you just going to tread on the safe side of your line today?

LibTired on December 29, 2009 at 10:12 AM

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Giddy-up!

If the airlines were in charge of their security and they did not fear of privacy & discrimination lawsuits (i.e,, they could tell customers if you don’t like it, don’t fly), I would guess that security would be better and more streamlined. We would probably already have teh Isreali model in place.

WashJeff on December 29, 2009 at 10:13 AM

The worst “I told you so”, one that all of us stated but hated to have it happen, but it was inevitable with this election….
“Terrorists attempts will ramp up with Obama in office, his weak leadership breeds that sort of contempt.”
No one wins a game being defensive, and no one wins a war being defensive, no one wins being defensive…you just sit back and wait for the onslaught. It takes a leader to be offensive, and we don’t have a leader, we have a politician.

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM

What do govt unions have to do with protecting the nation. DeMint’s to blame for politicizing our security to begin with. And you flying monkeys just do his bidding. Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

So DeMint’s the guy who INSISTED that TSA be unionized back in 2002? I coulda sworn that was you Democrats.

Patrick S on December 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM

This about airline security and I believe that the owners of the airlines should be allowed to do whatever they deem necessary to keep their customers safe. Flying on someone elses airline is a priviledge and not a right. If one dislikes the measures that a certain airline uses to keep it’s passengers safe you are free to seek other transportation options. No one has a right to tell person or company responsible for other human lives that you disagree with the methods in which they have determined will keep their customers safe. If you don’t like it buses, trains and automobiles are still available to you.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Absolutely.
Of course, that’s free market thinking, so it won’t be allowed.

ROCnPhilly on December 29, 2009 at 10:17 AM

Alex Jones show: Flight 253 an Inside Job

Your daily morning dose of crazy

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM

Tom_Shipley on December 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM

And where were you for the other terrorist attack? This is the 2nd!!! Two attacks, 14 killed in the first year of The One’s presidency…No attacks after 911 for his predecessor..Calling the War on Terror a “Man-made disaster”
Yep,I knew you libs wouldn’t be able to handle the One’s mishandling of the terrorist situation…Who was it that pressured the Bush administration to send two Yemen terrorist back to their hunting grounds, stating that they were going to be rehabilitated by taking art classes?
This IS Obama’s fault, and no we are not gloating–as you all did on 911…

lovingmyUSA on December 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Not possible for lots of reasons, whether the current litigatious society on “Discrimination”, Gun Laws, etc….Then the fact that Planes are being used as Missles to Destroy us.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:20 AM

They said they would “hit the ground running”, but they never said which direction they would run in….

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 9:42 AM

Sure they did. But all those who voted for him heard was “I’m not Bush.” But some are changing their tunes now to something like, “Don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone.” I love Cinderella.

And as I’m a realist, I’m pretty sure we’re going to be hearing Bush Blame right up until Jan 2013. Whatever it takes to help you focus on your golf game…

schafkopf on December 29, 2009 at 10:20 AM

Do the ACLU and privacy activists share the blame for Christmas Day attack?

No, they don’t share it. They own it.

MikeA on December 29, 2009 at 10:21 AM

No attacks after 911 for his predecessor

and over 20 something known thwarted plots, some of them major plots.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:21 AM

scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 10:01 AM

well said.

jbh45 on December 29, 2009 at 10:21 AM

coldwarrior on December 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM

That is the best, most consise arguement for that I have ever seen. Kudos!

MikeA on December 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Better to do patdowns of 2 million passengers a day, than to inconvenience one reported possible terrorist by putting him on a watch list.

The civil liberties bunch has some confusing ideas. Wouldn’t it be better to intrude as little as possible on the smallest number of people? Especially when the people being intruded upon have a high chance of being criminals or terrorists?

hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Good try pal, calling us racist…really don’t you ever try to use facts?
Wait, facts would prove you wrong….only liberals bring up race.

What do govt unions have to do with protecting the nation.

The nation’s 50,000 airport baggage screeners – upgraded to “federal transportation officers” under the Bush administration – could get another title under the Obama administration: Union members.

Here

Obama Plan to Grant TSA Workers More Union Rights Renews Debate Over Security Effect

TSA union fight threatens anti-terror bill

And you wonder what unions have to do with the TSA?

You don’t make sense…

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 10:24 AM

This about airline security and I believe that the owners of the airlines should be allowed to do whatever they deem necessary to keep their customers safe. Flying on someone elses airline is a priviledge and not a right. If one dislikes the measures that a certain airline uses to keep it’s passengers safe you are free to seek other transportation options. No one has a right to tell person or company responsible for other human lives that you disagree with the methods in which they have determined will keep their customers safe. If you don’t like it buses, trains and automobiles are still available to you.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Yep. I’m amazed at how so many things have become rights that must be defended by government involvement these days. Too many Americans are simply unable to think about changing their routine in order to protect themselves and their families. Their routine must never be changed, only other people’s routine.

If you have a job where you have to fly then suck it up. You can either a. get a new job. b. fly and deal with the screenings. If your plane blows up, you can cry all you want but that won’t change your decision. It’ not your fault that the plane blows up; the terrorist will pay for that. But it’s your fault that you were on the plane.

The same goes with driving. Hundreds of thousands of people die in car crashes every year. But if I decide to get in a car and drive today and get killed in a car crash, I bear the responsibility of that decision.

I guess, what I’m saying is that people are responsible for ALL of their decisions. If you fail to factor in the risk of you action, that’s your fault.

It’s irresponsible to live as if nothing can ever happen to you, and then cry about it when life happens.

You may say, ‘We musn’t give into to fear.’ I agree. But that doesn’t mean you don’t calculate the risk and decide if your action is worth the risk.

Every man and woman is responsible for his or her own actions.

j_galt on December 29, 2009 at 10:25 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Racist!

Johan Klaus on December 29, 2009 at 10:26 AM

Not possible for lots of reasons, whether the current litigatious society on “Discrimination”, Gun Laws, etc….Then the fact that Planes are being used as Missles to Destroy us.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:20 AM

Federal regulations have made air travel less safe not more. Political correctness will get many people killed and be the death knell for this once great country.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:26 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Congrats! The first to play the race card.

donh525 on December 29, 2009 at 10:27 AM

So DeMint’s the guy who INSISTED that TSA be unionized back in 2002? I coulda sworn that was you Democrats.

Patrick S on December 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM

growfins has no idea what he is talking about…he just rattles on…and then throws out the race card in desperation.
Most sites would ban the little guy for his race baiting…

right2bright on December 29, 2009 at 10:27 AM

Because it’s true and it undermines your Obama-is-a-Muslim-Manchurian-candidate meme?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

You can’t paint all of us with that brush, sir. I don’t happen to fall in that category. If this administration truly wants to blame someone for terrorist attacks, or the security devised to prevent them, they’re going to have to go back a lot farther than the Bush administration. Maybe you need to bone up on Terrorism 101.

scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 10:28 AM

Listening to NPR news in bed yesterday morning, the first 4 stories were:
1. Bombing in Pakistan
2. Underpants bomber from Yemen
3. Riots in Iran
4. Deaths in Afghanistan

It is pretty obvious that there is a common thread here.

drunyan8315 on December 29, 2009 at 10:29 AM

Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

ONLY after she said the “system worked”

This attempt was disgraceful – blame whomever you want, the fact of the matter is that being “politically correct” is to blame! PC will be the death of far too many innocents.

Seriously…. while I resent the fact that I would be subjected to a full body scan before boarding a flight, because I’m not going to have any nefarious materials on my person…. in order to catch the person who does have bomb materials or a weapon of some kind, it’s a necessary evil. I truly want to know that I’m safe thousands of feet in the air and will live to see another day – not become a statistic of some idiot that thinks all Americans should die. I have no wish to become a martyr for what should have been done.

If this guy had been successful, the innocent death toll unacceptable to us all, what would y’all be saying?? The bad guys exist people, we HAVE to do what’s necessary to protect us all.

Someone mentioned security measures should be left up to the individual airlines – that’s a good point. If they implement full body scans to make us safe and you don’t like it, go elsewhere. That’s probably the airline I’ll be sure to travel on.

ladyhawke53 on December 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Bush inherited a crumbling/bubble-popping economy from Clinton and the 9/11 attacks were planned and put into action during the Clinton administration (Clinton also failed to apprehend Osama bin Laden when he had the chance) and the security framework created by Clinton failed to detect/stop the attacks.

gwelf on December 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM

And remember, when bin Laden declared war on the US in 1996, he mentioned Bill Clinton by name in his Fatwa. bin Laden also later admitted that his wish was to have the 9/11 attacks carried out on Clinton’s watch. He treated terrorism as a law enforcement issue, not as a national security issue, and thus Bush inherited the deadliest attack on civilians in American history. And then later had his National Security “Advisor” steal and destroy classified documents from the National Archives in a clumsy attempt to shift the blame elsewhere.

That was Bush’s fault too.

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM

Because it’s true and it undermines your Obama-is-a-Muslim-Manchurian-candidate meme?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:04 AM

If he’s nothing more than a candidate, I guess we expect too much of him.

scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 10:32 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

I thought O’bama was half black.

Del Dolemonte on December 29, 2009 at 10:33 AM

Know thine enemy – Islam. What’s hard about that?

OldEnglish on December 29, 2009 at 10:33 AM

From RedState on the DeMint lie GrowFins is pushing:

The McClatchy headline is not even true. In fact, it is objectively a lie.

From the story itself, “Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) had not scheduled a floor vote on Southers before the Senate left town on Christmas Eve, and the Senate will not be back in session for another three weeks.”
So Reid hasn’t even tried to schedule a vote.

But what is most important is the reason for Jim DeMint’s hold on the TSA nominee. The nominee, Erroll Southers, has refused to go on record opposing the TSA from hooking up with a labor union. That’s right — the Obama administration is flirting with unionizing the TSA and Southers is refusing to say whether he supports or opposes the efforts.

Remember the Department of Homeland Security votes in 2002? The effort by Max Cleland (D-GA) to let that department unionize sank his re-election bid. The public does not want federal agents charged with protecting them unionizing.

We must prevent the TSA from operating like a trip to the DMV. Imposing union work rules would cripple an already burdensome airport experience. Jim DeMint is on the right side of this, despite McClatchy Newspapers and the White House trying to make him look like the bad guy.

jp on December 29, 2009 at 10:33 AM

Don’t you have a black first family to mock?

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Why, should people be mocked because of there color? Is that what you’re advocating?

Me, I mock people who are inept. And Obama is, amazingly, even more inept than Bush was, in dozens of ways.

hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 10:34 AM

constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure

That should end the moment you walk onto an aircraft. My “right” to arrive alive and not be blown apart at 30,000 feet trumps your “constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure”. You don’t want your “rights” violated? Then WALK.

GarandFan on December 29, 2009 at 10:35 AM

It is pretty obvious that there is a common thread here.

drunyan8315 on December 29, 2009 at 10:29 AM

Are they trying to distract jaded Dem listeners from Obama’s disastrous domestic policies by focusing more on his disastrous foreign policies?

hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 10:35 AM

because you have to be an adult and accept responsibility

blatantblue

Coming from you (“I hate my professors”) that’s pretty funny.

Grow Fins on December 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM

I heard on the news this morning that Obama did not nominate anybody for the TSA or Border Patrol administrators until September.

Howcome on December 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM

In one of several lawsuits the group has filed involving terrorist lists, the ACLU alleged that they “violate airline passengers’ constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and to due process of law.”

Why isn’t the searching of my luggage an unreasonable search and seizure? It seems to me a search is closer to a search than a list is to a search.

But it shouldn’t matter, anyway. Security should be part of your agreement with the airlines when you buy a ticket. IF you want to fly on our plane, THEN you agree to let us check your name against a no-fly list. If you don’t like that agreement, feel free to take your business elsewhere. This stance would be even easier to defend if the FAA had no role in security. As usual, the intrusion of government just messes stuff up.

hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM

constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure
That should end the moment you walk onto an aircraft. My “right” to arrive alive and not be blown apart at 30,000 feet trumps your “constitutional right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure”. You don’t want your “rights” violated? Then WALK.

GarandFan on December 29, 2009 at 10:35 AM

Constitutional rights are protections from the government. If I demand passengers do certain things to be allowed the priviledge to purchase my services it is my right. I have hundreds of others who don’t have a problem with my safety measures and if you do you are free to fly Achmed Airways.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM

I blame whoever thinks it’s ok to give some guy from Nigeria with explosives in his pants and mass murder as his intent any kind of rights whatsoever. There’s nothing partisan about that. Like Rove says, this guy is an enemy combatant, not a “criminal.” He has no rights here in the U.S. The ACLU will cry about his “rights” and privacy activists will cry about body scanning but this is the world we live in and we have to do what it takes to be safe. Once they figure out they’re not going to succeed with using planes as weapons, they’ll move on to something else and we’ll have to figure a way to stop that too.

scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM

Amazing. The trolls still have the balls to defend Barry and his merry band of incompetants.

anniekc on December 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM

Amazing. The trolls still have the balls to defend Barry and his merry band of incompetants.

anniekc on December 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM

Not really, they’re just furious you dare attack them.

Chris_Balsz on December 29, 2009 at 10:47 AM

As usual, the intrusion of government just messes stuff up.

hawksruleva on December 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM

Government interference is the problem not the solution. Turn airline security over to companies who specialize in security. The selection of these security companies should be left to the ownership of the airlines.

thomasaur on December 29, 2009 at 10:49 AM

Comment pages: 1 2