It seems to me that Mr. Akermann is not sufficiently knowledgable on these matters to contribute an interesting point of view. Lake does well, as usual.

I prefer the term Knickerbomber. How Napolitano still has a job after her 'system worked' comment is testament to this admin's incompetence. Nice to see they're attacking complaceny by trying to unionize. First things first. A better link re Ackermaing than anything posted: "But geez, the guy could at least get some of his facts straight!"
SA should stick to Bush death chants.

I like BVD Bomber it has sort of a ring to it.

Bush death chants?

Quoting piscivorous: I like BVD Bomber it has sort of a ring to it.

Harkin's got his knickers in a twist, is all.

LOL - Pat Buchanan wants to own people.

I just wanted to say that this is probably correct to an extent. That said, swallowing cause theories in general is far easier when it does not come across as the single overriding explanation for all that is wrong with an area. When the proponent of such a theory believes that, and further, goes out of their way to link every cause under the sun back to the US, it undermines the effectiveness and persuasiveness of that theory.
Because even if some of us grant significant leeway for cause and effect, we can still get tired of people spouting endless barrages of personal US blame for every ill they see in an area, speaking nothing of the homegrown ills and causes. Where you place the focus of the causes can render your analysis too skewed for a proper and complete understanding of the problems in a given area. Worse, it can often add to the deflections of the homegrown causes towards outside entities ( the US !!! ) and give rotten self governance quarter by placing undue weight on the effects of outside entities. All one need do to

I think you may have learned the wrong lesson Attackerman. Your mistake was in checking your alerts and tweeting during a movie. How rude. Please repent. You kids today! Ugh.
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/249...2:29&out=03:03

Gotta love Attackerman's tweet on the Knickerbomber. "Some idot set firecrackers off on a jet and were spsed to be afraid of that? Al-Q is a joke" And Yglesias tries to out-do him: "Obviously, people shouldn’t be lighting anything on fire inside airplanes. That said, all the big Christmas airline incident really shows to me is how little punch our dread terrorist adversaries really pack. Once again, this seems like a pretty unserious plot. And even if you did manage to blow up an airplane in mid-air, that would be both a very serious crime and a great tragedy, but hardly a first-order national security threat...." Does Yglesias have any idea as to the financial devastation done by the Lockerbie bomber (just ask Pan-Am)? He doesnt consider mass murder and devastating a once vibrant major carrier as a national security threat? Kinda scary that these two idjits influence public policy.

Quoting piscivorous: I like BVD Bomber it has sort of a ring to it.

Pretty good, but how about the undiebomber?

Quoting harkin: Gotta love Attackerman's tweet on the Knickerbomber.

"Some idot set firecrackers off on a jet and were spsed to be afraid of that? Al-Q is a joke"

And Yglesias tries to out-do him:

"Obviously, people shouldn’t be lighting anything on fire inside airplanes. That said, all the big Christmas airline incident really shows to me is how little punch our dread terrorist adversaries really pack. Once again, this seems like a pretty unserious plot. And even if you did manage to blow up an airplane in mid-air, that would be both a very serious crime and a great tragedy, but hardly a first-order national security threat...."

Does Yglesias have any idea as to the financial devastation done by the Lockerbie bomber (just ask Pan-Am)? He doesnt consider mass murder and devastating a once vibrant major carrier as a national security threat?

Kinda scary that these two idjits influence public policy.

Kinda nice that harkin doesn't.

Quoting AemJeff: Kinda nice that harkin doesn't.

Indeed. FSM save us from the bed-wetters, who are letting the terrorists accomplish the only thing they can even hope to accomplish. Surprisingly, David Brooks actually makes some sense on this point. (Proving once again, of course, that he is Not A Real Conservative™.)

You mean the ones that think reading a book in the first and last hour of flight is sufficient to deter the terrorists. No blankets no pillows no access to the overhead in that same time frame? Then there is the Emily Latel of homeland Security with the "the system worked" well never mind because I was quoted out of context (unless you actually look at the context, which make her look even stupider, than the in context quote) to the final never mind delivered by her boss with his "systemic failure" declaration. I quit flying in 1998/1999 because I was tired of being treated like a bovine being funneled through a sluice, now passengers are treated more like amoebas.

Just wanted to say congrats to Eli for becoming Nicotine-free. Neo Conservatism's first real accomplishment!!!

There is nothing like a good Iowahawk perspective on the whole BVD thing. The ability to use some humor to make a point is precious, even about deadly serious issues.

I'm not sure I see why it is utterly inconceivable that in a revolution the IRGC doesn't stay significantly intact and change their spots enough to fit into the new reality. Who's going to take their guns away?