(Giuliani: We Had No Domestic Attacks Under Bush; We've Had One Under Obama — January 8, 2010)

No Domestic Terror Attacks on Bush's Watch?

What about the DC sniper? Or the smiley face bomber who was leaving explosive packages in mailboxes in a big circle around the Midwest? What about the never-captured-by-Bush anthrax attacker who not only killed people with impunity, but taught a whole nation of domestic jackasses that they could shut down an airport or a school or a newspaper with a legal-size envelope and a handful of baking soda?

And, of course, let's not forget the shoe bomber Richard Reid. But maybe we're not counting terrorists who boarded airplanes in foreign countries where President Bush didn't have direct control over airport security. ÉOh, wait. That's what happened with the underwear bomber.

It is absurd to suggest that Bush 43, the man with the single worst record in American history at preventing homeland terrorism, somehow had unerring world-wide foreknowledge of terrorist activities during the remainder of his administration.

Or is Giuliani actually suggesting that Bush's intelligence team picked up chatter about the 2004 Madrid bombings, the 2005 London bombings, the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and simply chose not to inform our allies?

Yes, that's a good angle: Bush was always an infallible terror fighter. He just chose not to do it sometimes. Probably had brush to clear.

I bet that's why he ignored the warnings that Bin Laden was "intent on attacking America" which might have prevented the 9/11 attacks in D.C. and that other coastal city Ð oh, shoot, I'm having trouble remembering the name of it now. New-something? It's right on the tip of my tongue. But I guess if I can't remember the details of the "day that changed everything", maybe it's perfectly natural that New York mayor Giuliani has forgotten who was President during the attack on wherever-it-was. ÉNew Orleans maybe?

It's perfect rational to assume that the President who so badly bungled the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina Ð a catastrophe with plenty of advance notice and actionable "chatter" all over every major network Ð would have done a stellar job of handling the same situation if only it had been a dirty bomb instead.

That the President who read children's books during the September 11th attacks and then hid in an undisclosed location until it was all over, was somehow transformed by his embarrassing performance into a magical secret crime fighter who travelled the globe, invisibly preventing every terrorist attack since then. (Except, of course, the ones he obviously didn't prevent. But we don't count those.)

There is something truly disgusting about claiming that the President who started two wars (more than any President in history), leaving both of them unfinished (more than any President in history) is better at protecting American lives than a President who actually seems to do it effectively.

(Remember when Obama calmly and quietly took out the Somali pirates, while every chicken hawk in Washington was bitching about how he wasn't screaming and yelling at the Somali pirates?)

We need to hold the administration accountable for mistakes that were made during this recent attack. But reminiscing about the terror-filled utopia of the Bush years, and repeatedly bawling about September 11th in order to keep Americans in constant terror about terror, does nothing to protect them. It just makes them so freaked out that maybe they'll vote in another Republican next time who'll get us all killed.

Oh, wait. Now I get it.