Dana Milbank watches Eric Holder flounder and flail:
Eric Holder is a Guantanamo Bay prisoner.
He's not imprisoned at Gitmo, but he's imprisoned by Gitmo. The Justice Department he leads, and to some extent the whole Obama administration, has been detained -- tortured, even -- by the star-crossed attempt to close the military prison.
It began in the first hours of the administration, when Obama pledged to close Gitmo without a plan for doing so. It got infinitely worse in November, when Holder announced that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed would be tried in New York City.
So when Holder came before the Senate Judiciary Committee for questioning Wednesday morning, Democrats and Republicans confronted the attorney general with the same question: What's the plan? And Holder had no answer.
The plan was to strike a "Not Bush" pose, which was great fun while it lasted.
What's the plan, Eric? What's the frequency, Barry? Where's the Smart Diplomacy, Hillary!? We can well ask the entire carpy administration, "Where's the beef?" They are all empty suits.
Posted by: Frau Pfui! | April 15, 2010 at 12:32 PM
I think we know the plan:
It's Bush's fault for creating this problem that we have to come in and clean up.
It's certainly not our fault that we're completely incompetent to accomplish the goals that we said we'd accomplish.
Posted by: PD | April 15, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Easy solution. Congress simply passes a law that appoints a group of Gitmo detainees to the board of the rich greedy wall street bankers (when Obama says it, it can be easily be interpreted as JEWS!).
Once these GITMO detainees are rich bankers, I don't think anyone could stop Holder and Obama from hand gutting them themselves a dull buck knife.
problem solved..
Posted by: Pops | April 15, 2010 at 01:34 PM
Oh, well, they can always distinguish themselves from Bush on Russia, Israel and Iran.
Posted by: anduril | April 15, 2010 at 01:42 PM
Far off topic, but on my mind today:
I was putting together a fuel tax credit claim and ran across this line*:
For some reason I wondered if our well-travelled friend incurs this obligation every year.
----
* .pdf, page 2 line 8
** Yes, I understand this is only humorous if you've been looking at forms for the past few months.
Posted by: Walter | April 15, 2010 at 01:44 PM
Heh, Walter, I ran across an ad for a patent medicine yesterday which meant to say 'it can change your lives' but instead said 'it can change your liver'.
================
Posted by: Out of the mouths of Mad Ave Babes. | April 15, 2010 at 01:51 PM
All together now: Barry O and Eric H are 'EFFIN MUPPETS.
Posted by: NK | April 15, 2010 at 01:54 PM
Hey TM-- O/T, BUT, when is your post coming about the NSA indictment? Oh baby I can't wait until you dissect the potential NY Times' reporter/editor/publisher liability. After he gets through with Blago et al, maybe Fitzgerald will go back to DC/NY and look at this one. Oh Baby.
Posted by: NK | April 15, 2010 at 02:01 PM
Perhaps we can start blaming the GITMO detainees for global warming or maybe point out that they oppose abortion...
Posted by: Pops | April 15, 2010 at 02:22 PM
Anyone going to a tea party willing to carry a sign saying:
I SUPPORT OBAMAS ATTACK ON JEWISH BANKERS!
Posted by: Pops | April 15, 2010 at 02:30 PM
dunno about that one Pops, but Rush mentioned one he liked: "Regime Change"
Posted by: Bill in AZ | April 15, 2010 at 02:31 PM
So, what's up with the Harvard Law School? Are Holder and Obama "special" students or has the entire enterprise fallen off?
They are just not that smart. Rise to their defense, ye heavy laden.
Posted by: MarkO | April 15, 2010 at 03:00 PM
Say hello to the Dunning-Kruger administration:
Posted by: Mike G in Corvallis | April 15, 2010 at 04:06 PM
"I SUPPORT OBAMAS ATTACK ON JEWISH BANKERS!"
Wait till you see what he does to people who employ illegals.
THE PROSECUTORS RECOMMEND LIFE IN PRISON FOR SHOLOM RUBASHKIN FOR EMPLOYING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
This is beyond insane! If this was logical, there would not be a single illegal employed anywhere in the US today. Singling one employer out and holding him responsible and no one else is just plain wrong.
Posted by: Pagar | April 15, 2010 at 04:54 PM
GOP Senator: "Mr. Holder, what's your plan to close Gitmo."
Eric Holder: "Ummm, err, uhhhh....hey, did you know that my amps go to '11'"?
Posted by: MarkJ | April 15, 2010 at 05:43 PM
The absurdity of not being able to mention the word Islam when discussing terrorism at LUN
Posted by: peter | April 16, 2010 at 08:38 AM
re: LUST taxes and changing livers: i'm reminded of some delightfully maladroit examples of recent radio commercials in the Bay Area.
the first is from a medical group specializing in cosmetic laser therapy for varicose veins, whose commercials open with the question "do you have leg veins?"
the second, which used to reduce me to helpless laughter, was from a law group working with real estate loans and mortgage renegotiations, who declared that "we've been spearheading the economic downturn since its inception."
Posted by: macphisto | April 16, 2010 at 10:46 AM
A new McLaughlin poll of Jewish voters has only 42 percent of Jews saying that they’d vote to reelect Obama. Forty-six percent of Jews said they would be open to voting for someone else. The Jewish vote, while somewhat small, is significant. If the 2012 GOP candidate could approach the 39 percent post-war high-water mark set by Reagan, it would eat into Obama’s expected support in important purple states like Florida and Ohio.
Clarice posted about this new poll earlier.
As someone who has grown up with, and who went to school with, and been surrounded by liberal New York Jews my whole life, I hail this belated awakening, but really do wonder, what took so long, and why is it still 42 per cent? (the above quote is from today's NRO Corner.)
Posted by: peter | April 16, 2010 at 11:39 AM
Tradition, peter. Plus most live in big cities with the kind of news sources we poke sticks at
Posted by: Clarice | April 16, 2010 at 12:05 PM