......we have had TWO highly successful Islamic jihadist terror attacks on American soil.....
WTF? Highly successful? Jihadist terror attacks? Are you referring to the underwear bomber as one of these? You call that a successful attack on American soil? What makes this any different than Richard Reid the shoe bomber? If Abdulmutallab, who managed to sneak explosives on an international flight but couldn't ignite them, didn't manage to kill anyone and was subdued by his fellow passengers, was "successful" then so was Richard Reid who managed to sneak explosives on an international flight, didn't manage to kill anyone and was subdued by his fellow passangers, but his "successful" attack took place during the Bush administration thereby rendering your entire premise as nothing more than conservative BS.
And what was the other "successful" terrorist attack on American soil? The shooting at Fort Hood? You consider that a "successful" terrorist attack on American soil? What about these?
1. The Anthrax Letters (2001)
2. Hesham Mohamed Ali Hadayet opening fire in the LA Airport killing two Israelis (2002)
3. Four gunmen attacking the US Embassy in Syria (technically, the Embassy is US soil) killing one and wounding several (2006)
If you're calling the Ft. Hood shooting an act of terrorism then all of these were also acts of terrorism taking place "on American soil." After 9/11. During the Bush administration. So again, just more conservative BS.
Did someone F-up by letting Abdulmutallab on the plane? Yep. But take it from someone who travelled to Europe during the Bush Administration (2007), it's not as though the security was really stringent then either. Very few searches, nobody was asked to take their shoes off, cursory glances at passports... So let's at least be honest. It's not as if security was any tighter during Bush's term. So if Abdulmutallab is Obama's fault then Reid was Bush's fault.


