WTF, Jen?

[T]he inexplicably employed Jennifer Rubin [...] took to her space in the inexplicably still publishing Washington Post op-ed pre-school to argue the following [...]

Unlike Obama's tenure, [under GWB] there was no successful attack on the homeland after 9/11.

[...]

The very fact that anyone, even Jennifer Rubin, would make this argument publicly illustrates that we have not entirely integrated the facts of the 9/11 attacks into their proper place in our history and our memory. They were acts of savagery, but they were not mindless. They were deliberate and well-planned and they largely succeeded. Our national intelligence systems, and the people who were running them at the time, up to and including the incurious president of the United States, wandering the Texas scrub with his chain-saw, failed utterly to confront even the possibility that such attacks were possible, and thus failed utterly to keep anyone safe. Then, they responded by lying the country into a war of aggression that failed to keep thousands of American soldiers safe, that failed to keep hundreds of thousands of Iraqis safe, failed to keep the rule of law safe, and failed to keep the national economy, and the people who depend on it, which is pretty much all of us, safe. Those are only some of the things that C-Plus Augustus failed to keep safe, and they all pretty much began when he failed to keep 3000 of our fellow citizens safe in New York and Washington, and in a field in Pennsylvania, where died some brave people who actually did keep some people safe. All of the worst parts of that presidency flowed from that simple fact — that we did not really confront what happened on September 11, 2001.

  Charlie Pierce

I know. I just stand in awe of people who praise Bush saying he kept us safe - after all, there were no successful terror attacks after 9/11. Blinding (or just blind) stupidity.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.