2009 December | Hanlon's Razor

Rush in the hospital

By Hanlon, on December 31st, 2009 at 04:53 PM

No matter what your opinions are of the guy and his views, take a moment and wish him a quick recovery. Guy’s had a LOT of health problems in the past few years.

Break until 2010

By Hanlon, on December 30th, 2009 at 07:14 PM

I know I’ve been posting sporadically, so I’m just going to rest until after the New Year. Seeya all then!

On the spectacle of terrorism

By Hanlon, on December 28th, 2009 at 11:32 PM

As I wrote about the differences between Bush and Obama in their responses to terrorist threats, I found myself ruminating on the “why” of the situation. We know that the Bush mindset is one of constant fear of terrorist annihilation, of a capital-t Terrorist force that threatens our very existence at all times. Why, though?

It would be too easy to call it a power grab. Certainly the Bush administration and their corporate buddies in the defense industry stood to gain quite a bit in exploiting the “War on Terror”, be it in no-bid contracts or in electoral victories. The likes of Halliburton and Blackwater (now Xe) profited handsomely from the dual wars, and Bush and the GOP rode to victory on the back of terrorism in 2002 and 2004.

That might explain the motivation of our politicians, but it doesn’t explain the motivation of the cheerleaders. Bill Kristol and Sean Hannity have nothing to gain by hyping the terrorist threat outside of maybe a ratings boost, and it’s doubtful that they’d be playing the part of covert political operative by willfully deceiving the nation simply to affect elections. So what could be motivating the right-wing media, bloggers, and the people who support them?

To answer that, we have to play armchair psychologist. It certainly isn’t satisfying to live under constant fear of death at the hands of a shadowy enemy. What certainly is, though, is to live under the impression that you are destined to be the grand victor in a cosmic struggle of Good vs Evil.

Lots of the “War on Terror” trumpeters draw inspiration from the likes of 24 or The Dark Knight, which helps explain the mindset. They see characters like Batman and Jack Bauer and want to be like them, righteous heroes who stood up in the face of monumental evil and triumphed at all costs. It isn’t about feeling afraid, it’s about feeling as though you have a Purpose that is greater than yourself.

Hence our “War on Terror” is often described in grandiose terms that paint it not as a specific war against a single, focused enemy. Instead we’re told it’s a battle for civilization itself that knows no borders, with an enemy that could be anywhere and everywhere. They could be in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Yemen, in Palestine, they could be in your own neighborhood. The fight against terrorism is the greatest struggle humanity has ever faced, and only the strong are able to do what it takes to win.

It’s why Osama bin Laden drifted out of the spotlight over time. By focusing on the guy actually responsible for the September 11th attacks, it kept the idea too small. Bin Laden is just one man, and if he’d been captured and executed, the war would have ended. Can’t have that. It’s why we hear about “the lessons of September 11th” rather than dealing with events directly related to the attack. The war must be as monumental as possible.

By inflating the “War on Terror” to Biblical proportions, these cheerleaders feel as though they are part of an epic resistance, protecting the world against an enemy that stands poised to destroy not just our buildings and our lives, but the very fabric of civilization itself.

Apply it to the politicians as well. When George W Bush stood up at the podium and triumphantly described the terrorist attacks he’d foiled or why the wars were so crucial, he was crafting himself to be The Warrior President. Not just some guy in a suit muddling with tax proposals and budgets, no, Bush the Warrior stood at the helm as America faced its most terrifying villain yet, and only he had the fortitude to see the battle through. While soft “liberals” might be too weak to stand up to the enemy, Bush the Warrior did not blink, and nor did his supporters.

Men who played with GI Joes as children and failed to grow up, that’s what we’re dealing with.

Random observation

By Hanlon, on December 28th, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Between September 11th and now, we’ve spent a trillion dollars on two wars, decimated a pair of countries, weakened our military, lost thousands of American lives, spied on our citizens, made boarding an airplane a terrible ordeal, and it was thanks to a couple of plucky passengers and a reinforced cockpit door that a known terrorist was foiled.

What exactly have we accomplished?

NOTE: Worth mentioning, though, that this was a foreign flight and it wasn’t our TSA that did the security. But still, it goes to show what use all of our efforts have been.

QotD

By Hanlon, on December 27th, 2009 at 08:35 PM

This is how you know how things are going down the pooper.

Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House and one who had appealed to President Barack Obama not to yield on the public plan, set out conditions for yielding himself.

Obama, terrorism, maturity

By Hanlon, on December 27th, 2009 at 05:04 PM

So now that the holidays are over, we can go back to reading about the world around us. For example, the Yemeni terrorist who attempted to blow up an airplane traveling out of Nigeria on Christmas day.

Understandably, the story has set off a firestorm and caused a due amount of concern in all quarters. Fortunately, the threat was discovered, no one was hurt, and an investigation is under way to explain how this guy got on the plane in the first place considering he was a “person of interest” for some time.

What’s most striking, though, is the different tack President Obama is taking versus President Bush. You may have noticed the relative lack of public alarm-sounding in the wake of the event. This is entirely intentional.

…an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. [...]

Let the authorities do their work. Don’t presume; don’t panic the country; don’t chest-thump, prejudge, interfere, politicize (in an international sense), don’t give Al Qaeda (or whomever) a symbolic victory; resist the urge to open the old playbook and run a familiar play.

Whereas the old Bush officials would have swarmed the media with various officials talking about how deadly serious this attack attempt was and how it shows that we “cannot let our guard down”, Obama’s team seems to have figured out that unless there is something for the American people to do, then there is no need to bombard them with dire warnings and scary statements. Politics be damned.

Keep in mind, men like Cheney and the various pundits want a 9/11-like catastrophe on Obama’s watch to vindicate their claims that Obama is soft on security, and having him stay mum during all of this only fuels that fire. However, the president now obviously isn’t concerning himself with that, preferring to do what’s best, not what’s popular.

And it helps that this doesn’t appear to be anything but the work of one guy.

“Right now we have no indication it’s part of anything larger, but obviously the investigation continues,” US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told CNN, referring to the thwarted attack on a Northwest jet by suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, as the plane approached the city of Detroit, Michigan.

“This was one individual literally of thousands that fly and thousands of flights every year. And he was stopped before any damage could be done,” she said, praising how “effectively” passengers, crew and the global aviation sector responded.

She’s definitely right on that second part. He was a problem, it was neutralized, and now it’s being looked into. There’s no need to panic, and Obama’s making sure we don’t.

Xmas!

By Hanlon, on December 26th, 2009 at 05:10 PM

So how’d yours go? Got as good as you gave? Dinner with the family?

Democrat Parker Griffith switches to GOP

By Hanlon, on December 24th, 2009 at 10:39 AM

Not sure how I missed this one. Possibly because few people have any idea who the hell Parker Griffith is, as opposed to the high-profile defection of Arlen Specter or the monumental ouster of Joe Liebermen, but a party-switcher is still a party-switcher. And the fallout is hilarious.

After Griffith switched from the Democrats to the GOP, the former radiation oncologist who represents north Alabama lost all his House committee assignments, the state Democratic Party is demanding the return of sensitive voter identification data, the national Democratic Campaign Committee demanded its money back and several residents are questioning whether Griffith was a Republican all along.

Griffith lost his three House committee appointments on science and technology, small business and transportation and infrastructure.

Not that I like to concoct outlandish theories, but it ain’t impossible that a Republican of at least moderate bend would recognize the bad position the Republican party is in and make the decision to run on the other side to win a seat. Especially in a Congressional race that wouldn’t be too hard.

Of course, I heavily doubt that to be the case, since it nearly guarantees his life as a one-termer and leaves him devoid of any cool committee positions for a while.

Oh and now the GOP is looking for more.

Democratic Rep. Chris Carney received a phone call Wednesday from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asking him to consider becoming a Republican, a top GOP official told POLITICO.

Carney’s office at first did not comment other than to acknowledge the call, but Carney released a statement Wednesday night saying, in part, “I appreciate the Republican Party’s outreach, but I have no plans to change parties.”

I suppose that’s apropos, since McCain has made a business of being best friends with Democratic defectors, but the idea that the party is actively courting Democrats to change sides is somewhere between odd and obscene. Of course, that’s desperation for you. Who cares if the voters wanted a Democrat in office, let’s see if we can get some people to switch sides.