New York Times: Why I Dropped My 30 Year Subscription- Chapter 20,000
Well, there is apparently no end to the willingness of the press to collaborate with the Republican party in its attempt to destroy the Obama administration.Here's some more evidence from the "liberal" New York Times.
Quoting the right wing moron, Charles Krauthammer, the Times has this to say:
"Janet Napolitano — former Arizona governor, now overmatched secretary of homeland security — will forever be remembered for having said of the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit: ‘The system worked.’ ”
Of course, that is not what she said, but, if the likes of Krauthammer and the New York Times have their way, that's what she will be remembered for, all right.
Krauthammer continues, and the New York Times continues to quote him:
"The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face."
A terrorist threat that, since Bush ignored the multitude of warnings about Al Qaida in 2001, has resulted in how many American civilian casualties? Let's see now, that would be....none. Compare that to, say, the number of traffic fatalities in the country since 9/11, which would be over 300,000, or the number of tobacco deaths, estimated at over 400,000 per year.
Here is Obama's real crime: he has refused to cooperate with mindless Republican fearmongering. He should be applauded for that, not attacked. But, our "liberal" press feels otherwise. Of course, they have a very different attitude when considering the role of a certain administration that had seven years to deal with this issue. No, we won't mention that.
“Some Democrats have joined in calling for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to step down following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight a week ago.”
And just who are these "Democrats" that the New York Times managed to find, after its extensive jornalism? A New Jersey State legislator, and an adviser to Joe Lieberman. There you go. "Some Democrats."
They let Krauthammer blabber on:
"The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face."
That would be the threat, as I pointed out above, that in seven years has produced one guy with burned feet and one guy with a burned crotch. More injuries that that result from a lot of high school football games. The Times writer continues:
'Over at the Daily Beast, another conservative, my former Times colleague Reihan Salam, also shows some sympathy: “No one person deserves the blame for the unmitigated disaster that is U.S. air-travel security, which has done wonders for manufacturers of tiny plastic bottles of toothpaste and little else in the years since 9/11."
Of course, we are going to only blame one person in this article. Those other guys- hey, that's the past. Forget about them.
"...The real and lasting damage, however, is not to Janet Napolitano’s tenure in the Obama cabinet. Rather, it is to Democrats running in 2010."
Bush and Cheney didn't create a viable anti-terrorist system in seven years...It's good for the Republicans. Of course! Because mindless bluster is so much better than reality, and after all, it's always good for Republicans.
"Peter Feaver, a former consultant to the Bush’s administration’s National Security council who helps write Foreign Policy’s Shadow Government blog, maps a course: "We need the oversight hearings first …. We should demand that the Obama administration cooperate with those hearings and not stone-wall, as some have claimed they are doing.”
As "some" have claimed they are doing. Ah, yes. Who might these "some" be? Not a clue, but let me guess: Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, for starters. And hey, how about calling Bush and Cheney to see what they did to really deal with terrorism. I bet that would be interesting.
"....are the failures and missteps that almost led to catastrophe on Christmas day partially a result of the intense feuding between the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence that has characterized the Obama tenure from the start? That charge is leveled in the Post story and it is not wildly implausible.... Cheney’s warning looks prescient in light of recent reporting."
Cheney- don't make me gag. He had SEVEN YEARS to deal with this problem, and what did he do, besides a bunch of belligerent posturing that only made things worse? Why didn't you ever ask him to give an account of his actions? Bush administration officials ignored Congressional subpoenas and point-blank refused to provide information to Congress, time after time. Where was your anger at those incidents of stonewalling? No, I guess you were saving that for unsubstantiated (and untrue) right wing accusations against a Democratic president.
Why don't you guys just shut up until you have something to contribute beyond doing everything you can to blame Republican failures on Democrats?
Quoting the right wing moron, Charles Krauthammer, the Times has this to say:
"Janet Napolitano — former Arizona governor, now overmatched secretary of homeland security — will forever be remembered for having said of the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit: ‘The system worked.’ ”
Of course, that is not what she said, but, if the likes of Krauthammer and the New York Times have their way, that's what she will be remembered for, all right.
Krauthammer continues, and the New York Times continues to quote him:
"The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face."
A terrorist threat that, since Bush ignored the multitude of warnings about Al Qaida in 2001, has resulted in how many American civilian casualties? Let's see now, that would be....none. Compare that to, say, the number of traffic fatalities in the country since 9/11, which would be over 300,000, or the number of tobacco deaths, estimated at over 400,000 per year.
Here is Obama's real crime: he has refused to cooperate with mindless Republican fearmongering. He should be applauded for that, not attacked. But, our "liberal" press feels otherwise. Of course, they have a very different attitude when considering the role of a certain administration that had seven years to deal with this issue. No, we won't mention that.
“Some Democrats have joined in calling for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to step down following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight a week ago.”
And just who are these "Democrats" that the New York Times managed to find, after its extensive jornalism? A New Jersey State legislator, and an adviser to Joe Lieberman. There you go. "Some Democrats."
They let Krauthammer blabber on:
"The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face."
That would be the threat, as I pointed out above, that in seven years has produced one guy with burned feet and one guy with a burned crotch. More injuries that that result from a lot of high school football games. The Times writer continues:
'Over at the Daily Beast, another conservative, my former Times colleague Reihan Salam, also shows some sympathy: “No one person deserves the blame for the unmitigated disaster that is U.S. air-travel security, which has done wonders for manufacturers of tiny plastic bottles of toothpaste and little else in the years since 9/11."
Of course, we are going to only blame one person in this article. Those other guys- hey, that's the past. Forget about them.
"...The real and lasting damage, however, is not to Janet Napolitano’s tenure in the Obama cabinet. Rather, it is to Democrats running in 2010."
Bush and Cheney didn't create a viable anti-terrorist system in seven years...It's good for the Republicans. Of course! Because mindless bluster is so much better than reality, and after all, it's always good for Republicans.
"Peter Feaver, a former consultant to the Bush’s administration’s National Security council who helps write Foreign Policy’s Shadow Government blog, maps a course: "We need the oversight hearings first …. We should demand that the Obama administration cooperate with those hearings and not stone-wall, as some have claimed they are doing.”
As "some" have claimed they are doing. Ah, yes. Who might these "some" be? Not a clue, but let me guess: Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, for starters. And hey, how about calling Bush and Cheney to see what they did to really deal with terrorism. I bet that would be interesting.
"....are the failures and missteps that almost led to catastrophe on Christmas day partially a result of the intense feuding between the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence that has characterized the Obama tenure from the start? That charge is leveled in the Post story and it is not wildly implausible.... Cheney’s warning looks prescient in light of recent reporting."
Cheney- don't make me gag. He had SEVEN YEARS to deal with this problem, and what did he do, besides a bunch of belligerent posturing that only made things worse? Why didn't you ever ask him to give an account of his actions? Bush administration officials ignored Congressional subpoenas and point-blank refused to provide information to Congress, time after time. Where was your anger at those incidents of stonewalling? No, I guess you were saving that for unsubstantiated (and untrue) right wing accusations against a Democratic president.
Why don't you guys just shut up until you have something to contribute beyond doing everything you can to blame Republican failures on Democrats?
Comments