Social Question

JJJones's avatar

Are the Republicans being fair with their criticism toward President Obama over the Christmas bomber incident?

Asked by JJJones (72 points ) January 8th, 2010

Bush waited 6 days before making a public statement about the shoe bomber. Obama waited 3 days before making a public statement about the Christmas bomber. This makes Obama’s a procrastinator for waiting 3 days, but Bush wasn’t a procrastinator because he waited 6 days. Obama bad, Bush good.

The shoe bomber was tried and convicted by the Bush administration in federal court. The Obama administration plans to try the Christmas bomber in federal court. Obama bad, Bush good.

Bush said he wanted to close Gitmo. Obama said he wanted to close Gitmo. Obama bad, Bush good.

Bush released 530+ prisoners from Gitmo. Obama released 40 prisoners from Gitmo. Obama bad, Bush good.

Less than a year into Bush’s presidency the U.S. suffered the worst terrorist attack on our soil in the country’s history, resulting in over 3,000 dead Americans. Less than a year into Obama’s presidency there has been no succesful terrorist attack in our country. Obama bad, Bush good.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

24 Answers

Rufus_T_Firefly's avatar

No, I do not think the criticism is fair. Conservative pundits and critics lashed out with every worn-out key-word or phrase that they could think of to try and paint a dark picture of Obama’s faster-than-Bush response.

marinelife's avatar

I think the criticism is vastly unfair. the systems that failed were Bush’s systems. The Obama Administration had not substantively changed them.

I find it annoying that that never gets mentioned.

filmfann's avatar

Hannity, Beck, Coultier, and O’Reilly have to talk about this stuff, as if Obama isn’t the man Bush was, because they have been told they can’t say Nigger on television.
And they really want to.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

Of course they’re not being fair. But their modus operandi appears to be to tell the same lies over and over again until someone believes them.

SABOTEUR's avatar

At least he capitalized “Nigger”.

JJJones's avatar

@Dr Dredd Yes, Rush, Beck, etc…repeat the same “sound bites,” over and over!

CaptainHarley's avatar

@filmfann

So anyone who disagrees with you is a racist? Well… I guess that makes me a racist.

Snarp's avatar

Of course not, but since when is politics fair?

ubersiren's avatar

They have no room to bash. It’s a good thing to be critical of the president, but them being so harsh on Obama just to make their own party look better is lame.

Rufus_T_Firefly's avatar

In my book, political fairness ranks right up there with intelligence and equality. It is one thing to be critical of a President. It is quite another thing to repeat an obvious lie, ignore pertinent facts or rely on smoke and mirrors to get your point across just because your chosen political party is doing it.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

Obama has been fairly critical of himself over this incident. Rightly so, IMHO. However, the Republican attacks on him are just politics as usual. They started this bullshit before he was elected, and they won’t stop until he’s out of office – preferably on January 20, 2017. They’re out of power, they can’t stand it, and they’re going to squeal like the little pigs they are, for as long as that situation continues, because it’s the only thing available to them.

They think they’re winning, too. Every time Obama’s polling numbers drop, they figure the tactic is working. They’re not paying attention to their own numbers, or they might decide on a different strategy, i.e. participating in the government instead of bashing it.

JJJones's avatar

@IchtheosaurusRex before he was elected…first time in my life that I’ve ever seen that! And, I’m 63 years old. Just amazing!

ragingloli's avatar

Nope. I find it ridiculous that republicans try to blame Obama for the failure of a system that they themselves created. What he should respond with is “Sorry that I trusted in the effectiveness of your system. Sorry that I believed you could not be that incompetent.”

It also seems to me that the only reason there has not been another 9/11 is that the terrorists have not actually tried to repeat it yet, as seeing how ineffective the monstrous security apparatus is, they could have easily succeeded.

mattbrowne's avatar

It’s the job of the opposition party to check on the government. If criticism is justified voters will reward them. If not, voters will reward the government. In this case I don’t think the criticism is justified.

Russell_D_SpacePoet's avatar

I think the criticism should be of the system itself. Obama is in charge. So naturally some criticism will be of him. Right or wrong. The system was in place when Obama came in to power, but if it is flawed,(which is quite obvious after underwear bomber) his people should have reviewed the overall situation and made changes as they thought best. I think Obama will make the changes needed. Communication between intelligence agencies is key.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

@ragingloli , don’t ever underestimate the absence of short-term memory on the part of swing voters, who are the only voters that count any more. They’re like little kids, too – they vote for one party, they don’t get immediate gratification, so they try the other guys again. Never mind that the Republicans almost torpedoed the economy and it is recovering only because of the interventions of the DEMOCRATIC government we have now.

Snarp's avatar

You know, the system worked better than many people think. They knew that an attack was planned, and they attacked the bases in Yemen where the attacker was trained and the attack planned because of that intel. They were just a little slow and the warning about the specific individual from his home country was a fairly standard warning that consulates get all the time, so it was missed. No, it didn’t all work, but it was a darn site better than what was done with the 9/11 intel. Guess we need to change the process of how we handle individual warnings, maybe creating another class of warning, but that would require substantial international cooperation.

Sarcasm's avatar

Time and time again the Fox news idiots (and yes, I chose them instead of “Republican party” for a reason. There are at least some non-insane Republicans. Probably.) are saying shit that’s the polar opposite of what they’ve said in the bush administration.

At least this one makes sense. You see, because Obama waited 72 hours, but Bush waited 6 days. 72 is a much larger number than 6.

I remember hearing a few years ago, O’reilly spouting off that it is UNAMERICAN to criticize your president. I guess that rule changes when a Democrat is in office.

It’s really sickening to see all of this happen. But I get some enjoyment out of it whenever Jon Stewart points it out. I can’t imagine how much of it he doesn’t point out.

Snarp's avatar

Not only are they unfair, they’re forgetful. Rudy Giuliani said: “We had no domestic attacks under Bush; we’ve had one under Obama.” Or maybe he can’t count?

mass_pike4's avatar

are they bias, yes. Is all media bias, yes. Are there individuals who give the Republican party a bad rep? Yes. Are there individuals who give the Democratic party a bad rep? Yes.

Whatever. It is the way it is. The president is going to be criticized no matter what. It’s messed up, but it’s politics. We will never all look at something the same way.

So, to answer your question more directly, the republicans were not being fair towards the situation. The democrats were not fair towards a lot of things Bush did either.

I honestly can’t bare how bad the parties are. It is a freaking rivalry, sometimes pure hatred. It’s unbelievable and sickening.

westy81585's avatar

To some degree, criticism is deserved. The system messed up, and he’s in control of the system. So even though it wasn’t a direct screw up on his part, it still falls on him (and he’s accepted said blame). BUT, many on the right have gone WAY too far with it, turning it into some ridiculously partisan thing. Doesn’t surprise me, national security is their lifebread. Frightening the American public into thinking we could die at any moment is how they won the election in 2004. If you suck with the economy, domestic issues, and even bungled a war (another supposed Republican strong point), why not stick with the play that worked in the past.

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

It was an under-resourced system that failed. Our CinC took personal responsibilty. What more can we ask for?

filmfann's avatar

@CaptainHarley I didn’t say everyone. I mentioned the names of those I meant.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther