‘Regime,’ is it?

Slapdash, or scaredy-cat?  Does it matter?

The lack of self-respect in the Obama administration astounds me, sometimes.  From the (probably-now abortive) pushback on the call to shut down repatriating AQ terrorists to Yemen:

“I am aware of a lot of people pointing back at the way the transfers were handled under the Bush administration that apparently they have some concerns about that,” said the official, who had not seen the senators’ letter. “I didn’t hear many of those concerns at the time, but there were obviously hundreds and hundreds of detainees that were transferred under the old regime.”

The official hadn’t also seen Sen. Feinstein’s (D) own shared concern about said repatriation, which as Ed Morrissey notes is a serious problem for the drive to close Gitmo.  But never mind that, right now: what gives with all the unforced errors?  I mean, if this was an unintentional attempt to give offense, it’s pretty sloppy thinking; and if it was intentional, well, way to go with putting words in the administration’s mouth there, Sparky.  A true progressive would have had the elementary courage to put his or her Bush Derangement Syndrome on the record.

Well, either way I can’t say that I’m surprised.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

If at first you don’t succeed…

(Via Instapundit) There’s a lot of meat in this post about How The System Worked, but what struck/disquieted me was this almost-casual observation:

Al Qaeda seems to have a lot of respect for US border security screening.  That’s why it is trying to commit terrorist attacks on US soil without actually entering the US.  Since border measures were strengthened after 9/11, al Qaeda has tried three separate plots using the same basic technique — get on a transatlantic flight and blow it up before it lands and before the terrorists are put through our border screening process.  Every plot has failed.  But if this doesn’t remind you of the successive World Trade Center attacks, you’re not paying attention.  They’ve got a schtick, and they’re going to keep using it until it works.

You ever hear what the IRA once told the British? “We only have to be lucky once. You have to be lucky all the time.” That’s how terrorists think: stop them nineteen times and they’ll keep coming back for a twentieth bite at the apple.  That doesn’t mean that they can’t be deterred or suppressed; but you can’t do either by waiting for them to commit a crime and then arrest them all.  You do either by finding them and killing everybody who doesn’t surrender, and by detaining the ones who do so that you can interrogate them and get more intelligence about their compatriots still remaining alive and at liberty.

We don’t let cops do that in this country.  We don’t want cops to be able to do that in this country.  Given the way that the Left has indirectly encouraged this country’s growing acceptance of torture, one wonders why they seem so determined to also encourage the American people to think that it’s necessary to let cops be able to do that.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Sen. Chris Dodd (D): airport screenings for explosives doubleplusungood.

In fairness, that money was just sitting there, all fat, dumb and happy, and practically begging to be misappropriated to some domestic pork program.  Besides, how was Dodd supposed to know that international terrorists would come up with the novel idea of using explosives to try to blow up airplanes?

Now that our attention is focused on airline security measures thanks to the failed airline attack on Christmas Day, it’s worth mentioning that one Senator took money away from aviation security to line the pockets of constituency that supported his presidential campaign in a big way.

Back in July, Senator Chris Dodd, D-Conn., proposed an amendment reducing aviation security appropriations by $4.5 million in favor of firefighter grants — a notoriously inneffective program. In fact, the money was specifically “for screening operations and the amount for explosives detection systems.”

…oh, wait.

Via Jim Geraghty, who notes that the Senate in general signed off on the amendment (S.AMDT.1458 to H.R.2892; it was part of the Homeland Security appropriations bill).  This is fostering an atmosphere where you have the ability to read and assess bills before you sign them is so critically important…

…oh, wait.

Moe Lane Continue reading Sen. Chris Dodd (D): airport screenings for explosives doubleplusungood.

Word of advice for 2012 convention planners?

Pick somewhere easily accessible via train.

In the wake of the terrorism attempt Friday on a Northwest Airlines flight, federal officials on Saturday imposed new restrictions on travelers that could lengthen lines at airports and limit the ability of international passengers to move about an airplane.

The government was vague about the steps it was taking, saying that it wanted the security experience to be “unpredictable” and that passengers would not find the same measures at every airport — a prospect that may upset airlines and travelers alike.

But several airlines released detailed information about the restrictions, saying that passengers on international flights coming to the United States will apparently have to remain in their seats for the last hour of a flight without any personal items on their laps. It was not clear how often the rule would affect domestic flights.

Ooh, ooh, I can answer this one! The answer is “A lot!” After all, the people making the rules here don’t actually have to suffer under them, so there’s no negative feedback loop to keep them from saddling us with onerous travel restrictions designed to hide the fact that the system did not, in fact, work.  So expect the geniuses currently running the government to make sure that that the rules are blindly applied across the board; it beats thinking, right?

For more, see The Agitator, via RS McCain; and Hot Air.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

DHS Director Janet Napolitano: “the system worked.”

I… I… I…

words fail me.  Via Hot Air Headlines:

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.”

Moe Lane

PS: No, not even profanity.  It’s that bad.

Crossposted to RedState.

The good news about this attempted terrorist attack?

There’s only one bit of good news, but it’s reassuring: airline passengers haven’t forgotten the Flight 93 Lesson.

Jafry was sitting in the 16th row — three rows behind the passenger — when he heard “a pop and saw some smoke and fire.” Then, he said, “a young man behind me jumped on him.”

In short: you can’t always choose not to be a target, but you can always choose not to be a victim.

Meanwhile, back in Honduras…

…Zelayista terrorists attacked a newspaper critical of the ousted, would-be dictator.


Firebombs hurled at Honduran newspaper office

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — A Honduran editor says assailants threw molotov cocktails at the offices of his newspaper, setting fire to the entrance.


The attack early Saturday was the sixth against media outlets and other institutions critical of Zelaya.

Besides Fausta, see also La Gringa’s Blogicito for more Honduran updates.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Cantor asking questions about our IMF money.

So. Last week, Representatives Cantor and Hoyer had a bit of an exchange over where the money we’re giving the International Monetary Fund is going.  Cantor wants to know why we’re going to be giving countries that don’t like us at all the opportunity to take our money, and Hoyer wants to know why Cantor is ignoring the way that Hoyer is brandishing Reagan’s name like an apotropaic talisman:

CANTOR: Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time. I will tell the gentleman, New York Times, May 27, 2009, pointed out Hezbollah, the Shiite militant group involved in Lebanon and its government, had talks with the IMF to discuss the possibility of the extension of credit…We are very, very concerned. There is a real possibility that some of the world’s worst regimes will have access to additional resources that will be provided to the IMF, and is he not concerned about that?

[possible snip: the Congressional Record transcript is down]

HOYER: The reason the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration–and I might say, although I don’t have a quote from the second Bush administration, the second Bush administration, as well, was a supporter of the IMF as the gentleman, perhaps, knows.

The fact of the matter is the United States will play a very significant role in the decisionmaking of the IMF because we’re a very significant contributor. It is a red herring, from my perspective, to raise the fact that money could go somewhere. Of course money could go somewhere.

…which Hoyer then followed up with this inadvertent comment, which the Hill’s Blog Briefing Room mercifully omitted:

Continue reading Cantor asking questions about our IMF money.

Liz Cheney: no middle ground.

Another good bit from Liz Cheney:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Allahpundit is a little surprised that Liz’s popularity with the base has risen so quickly; I’m not. For whatever reason, a full-throat defense of Bush’s decisions on how to fight the GWOT were few and far between during the Bush administration itself, and that grated with Republicans. It grated on me, in fact, and I take the position that Bush actually didn’t have much choice in the matter. So, when Liz showed up last month and casually obliterated Norah O’Donnell… water to thirsty soil, my droogies. Like water to thirsty soil.

I will note one thing, however: while it would have been nice to have this conversation during the last campaign, it wouldn’t have happened even if Cheney had somehow been running for President. Based on the actual campaign and extrapolating, the Democrats would have instead run on a platform that equally highlighted Cheney’s age, his aim, and his lesbian daughter.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.