Liberals Still Getting Terror Wrong

You'd think the Christmas terror attempt might wake up some on the left who still labor under the delusion that the world likes us better for having elected Obama. It seemed a clear sign to most that not only do the terrorists still wish us harm, they're smart enough to engage in the psychological aspect of an attack on our biggest holiday.

But if, like me, you did think eyes would be opening... you'd be wrong.

In a HuffPo piece today, Malou Innocent warns that the Obama administration must not overreact:

"In times of terrorism, the first casualty is American values."

Uh, no. In times of terrorism, the first casualties are the innocents, killed or injured by those who wish to break our spirit and send us into panic.

"The Obama administration must counter its impulse to overreact to this recent terrorist incident."

Incident? This was an attempt to blow up an airplane full of people, and yet it's already been reduced to an "incident"... one we should be careful not to overreact to.

Or consider this from Washington Monthly:

"Obama and his team obviously prefer a far more mature, strategic approach. It's about projecting a sense of calm and control. It's about choosing not to elevate some lunatic thug who set himself on fire."

-snip-

"It's about competent and effective leadership, and it's what the country was sorely lacking up until 11 months ago."

This mindset (which our President shares) is why we're screwed. You have a portion of the left who views terrorists (apparently) as unruly children who are best dealt with by not reacting strongly to their misbehavior. You have another portion who thinks the greatest tragedy of 9/11 was the Patriot Act - never mind nearly 3,000 dead Americans. Then you have those on the left who genuinely believe this is all our fault, and if we would just bring home every soldier and mind our own business then life would be peaceful and perfect. (Europe should thank their lucky stars this crew wasn't in power when it came time to fight in WWII.)

Is Obama's lack of reaction to the attempted bombing (not to mention the uprising in Iran) disappointing? Of course it is. Is it surprising? Not at all.

At this point, I'm only surprised that Obama's reaction wasn't to apologize for America's sins before bowing deeply to Abdul Farouk Umar Abdulmutallab.
---------

UPDATE: Robert Stacy McCain puts it better on his blog and in an American Spectator piece:

"Rather, liberals feared that Americans might blame the Obama administration for failing to protect them from terrorists or -- perhaps even worse -- demand action against the violent extremists who want to kill us all.

Liberals believe most of their fellow citizens are benighted troglodytes, so there was also the frightening possibility of a xenophobic hate-crime backlash."

It's amazing (to me) that liberals can take such a negative view of their fellow Americans, yet be willing to extend every benefit of the doubt to those who would do us harm. McCain closes with:

"From the so-called "anti-anti-communism" of the liberal past, we have arrived at the anti-anti-terrorism of the liberal present. We are not permitted to question the good intentions of liberals, although perhaps it is still permissible to point out the destination of the road notoriously paved with such intentions."

Perhaps. But I doubt it. Anyone with the audacity to question Obama's "mature" handling of the situation will be branded a fear monger who's overreacting - probably out of racism and intolerance. Liberals, who seem to believe we require the government to control every aspect of existence, would rather we sit back and calm down while the grownups handle the "incident".