« | »

Holder Can’t Say Muslim, Or Read AZ Bill

From the Washington Times:


Holder balks at blaming ‘radical Islam’ for terror attempts

Stephen Dinan

Friday, May 14, 2010

Despite crediting the Pakistani Taliban with fostering the recent failed car bombing in Times Square, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. was reluctant Thursday to say radical Islam was part of the cause of that and other recent attacks.

Mr. Holder, testifying to the House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly balked at a half-dozen questions from Rep. Lamar Smith, the ranking Republican on the committee, about whether "radical Islam" was behind the attempted car bombing, last year’s so-called "underpants bomber" or the killings at Fort Hood in Texas.

"There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious," Mr. Holder told the committee Thursday, though he would not go further than saying people who hold radical views may have "had an ability to have an impact" on Faisal Shahzad, the man the Justice Department says tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square…

“Potentially religious.” That is truly hilarious. Mr. Holder may have even surpassed his previous entries in his long history of asinine remarks.

He’s into Joe Biden territory now.

"I don’t know why the administration has such difficulty acknowledging the obvious, which is that radical Islam might have incited these individuals," Mr. Smith, Texas Republican, said after the hearing. "If you can’t name the enemy, then you’re going to have a hard time trying to respond to them."

To be fair, it’s probably hard to consider anyone an ‘enemy when’ they share so many of your values – such as the destruction of the United States and Western Civilization in general.

In his near daylong appearance before the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Holder was repeatedly asked about Arizona’s new immigration law, which the attorney general has criticized and suggested may run afoul of the Constitution.

Mr. Obama has asked the Justice Department to review the law to determine whether the federal government should try to block it before it takes effect at the end of July.

But Mr. Holder acknowledged to the committee that he hasn’t read the law, and his criticisms were based on what he’s seen on television or read in the newspapers about the law.

"I’ve just expressed concerns on the basis of what I’ve heard about the law. But I’m not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with people who are doing the review, exactly what my position is," Mr. Holder said.

Mr. Holder first claimed that he had “glanced at” the bill. But, as we have previously noted, the bill is so short that it would be practically impossible to “glance at” it without actually reading it. (See the clip above.)

Still, who does Mr. Holder think he is, a Congressman? It used to be traditional to read a piece of legislation before you demonized it – or voted on it. But, apparently, that is an America that has long since disappeared.

Last weekend, Mr. Holder told NBC’s "Meet the Press" program that the Arizona law "has the possibility of leading to racial profiling." He had earlier called the law’s passage "unfortunate," and questioned whether the law was unconstitutional because it tried to assume powers that may be reserved for the federal government.

Rep. Ted Poe, who had questioned Mr. Holder about the law, wondered how he could hold those opinions if he hadn’t yet read the legislation.

"It’s hard for me to understand how you would have concerns about something being unconstitutional if you haven’t even read the law," the Texas Republican told the attorney general

Obviously, Mr. Holder didn’t want to prejudice himself by reading the Arizona bill. He didn’t want the facts of the matter to get in the way of his and Mr. Obama’s political agenda here.

Mr. Holder said he expects the Justice and Homeland Security departments will finish their review of the Arizona law soon…

Yes, but will they ever read it?

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, May 14th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

15 Responses to “Holder Can’t Say Muslim, Or Read AZ Bill”

  1. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    “attempted car bombing, last year’s so-called “underpants bomber” or the killings at Fort Hood in Texas.”

    Why has everybody forgotten about the shooting of two of our warriors at a recruiting depot in Arkansas? A TERRORIST act also motivated by ISLAM.

  2. RightWinger says:

    Too bad Holder wasn’t asked if he ever read the Constitution. I would love to see him spin-n-squirm in trying to answer that landmine.

    If Holder was a Republican appointee, can you imagine the non-stop fall out from the MSM for saying he got his initial opinion from what he heard on TV and News programs? The DNC/MSM talking points would read “AG (R) admits he did not read bill, but got his opinion from listening to Rush Limbaugh”.

  3. JohnMG says:

    Bring in the clowns!

    Seems we only got half the story with a guy named Holder. What he really is, is a place-holder until the people of this country can come up with a REAL Attorney General.

    Until then, Eric will have to be the poster boy for all that sucks about ‘affirmative action’.

    • Petronius says:

      The Arizona statute was signed into law by Gov. Jan Brewer on 23 Apr, three weeks before this hearing.

      And he still has not read it.

      And his staff has still not briefed him.

      That degree of incompetence would be grounds for dismissal from any other law office in the country.

      Perhaps we should be thankful that Tigellinus-Holder runs such an inefficient department. If he were proficient at his job, things might be even worse. If he and his department were not so inept, we could all be in real deep kimchi.

  4. tranquil.night says:

    Eric, what is the first thing you think of when you hear the words Catholic Priest?

    Now who’s responsible for that?

  5. Rusty Shackleford says:

    My god, Holder is such an effing R-word. Watching and listening to that exchange reminded me of every conversation I witnessed between a responsible adult and a hippie in the 1960’s/1970’s.

    The adult provides basis for thoughtful reply, the respondent (hippie) “uh-er-uh” and “um, uh, well…uh” their way through SOME sort of answer. Cannot give a direct response like “no” or “yes”. Or even form a cogent argument mainly because the emotions are all broiled up and clouding their ability to think; Possibly due to drug use or just using not enough brain cells, or both.

    What I take away from this is Ted Poe talking as an adult to a child.

    I also figure that Holder had a tantrum when he was returned to the womb of his office and probably took it out on someone else. Also, this is what liberals deem “republicans being mean” or mean-spirited. It easily tracks back to the liberals desire to be left alone to do “whatever” and “just hang out, man”. Where having fun and partying was way more important than cleaning the garage or doing homework.

    I could see in his face, “Like why are you hasslin’ me, man…? Like what’d I ever do to you, man?”

    But it’s also obvious that Holder cam unprepared to class and probably thought he would win the day by making fun of teacher. However, he got owned by Poe and all that will happen is his desire to retaliate and act more like a spoiled brat. That’s what children do rather than lick their wounds, learn a lesson and next time come to class prepared and with a more cogent argument.

    He had none and he knew it. But, I fail to see how that helps any of them argue against Arizona and their new law. Unless of course, the whole premise is to fight it on emotional grounds. IOW-tantrum trumps logic and practical law-enforcement.

    But to what end? A shining utopia where the white people are forever punished? Got news for ya, if you push hard enough, the white people know how to better organize, take over and kick your sorry butts out. It may come to that if you just—keep—pushing. Then, you’ll have what you want, right?

    I wish I had a time machine and could go back to the 1670’s and stop any European from subscribing to slavery. The way the world would look today would be remarkably different with Africa a broken, war-torn continent and standing as an example of what not to do, while the United States would be a prosperous, happy, albeit only slightly dysfunctional nation. The coffers would be largely full as there would be no white guilt to drain them, no affirmative action for lazy so-and-so’s and most Americans would understand what freedom really means.

    Well, maybe not but….it’s a nice dream. That would be my utopia…not this malarkey about how our “melting pot” has ultimately helped this nation overall. Though I’ve no problem with people who work, participate and subscribe to common decency, I think we would’ve been far better off without a slave-trade, or indentured servitude, etc.

    Think of how much guilt there WOULD NOT BE in even the most liberal of liberals. Sure, they’d pick up some other “cause” but most of their inability to function in society would be erased if they didn’t side with the fallacious argument that whites are to blame for all the bad in the world.

    • proreason says:

      “I wish I had a time machine and could go back to the 1670’s and stop any European from subscribing to slavery”

      If it weren’t for slavery, Holder would be prodding a cow with a stick in Africa….unless he had already been trampled by one.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      It’s an argument I often use about while the West was exploring, (exploiting, if you feel comfortable with that), building, creating, painting, and along came the telescope, the harpsichord/piano, orchestras, study of microbiology (again, thanks to the invention of the lens), the steam engine, banking, currency, submarines, the zipper…on and on and on…..the African was busy fighting tribal wars and pretty much not desirous of any new inventions. Not even the wheel, so far as I understand.

      Isn’t that the definition of stagnation?

      But, what the hey…If they were happy….fine.

  6. JohnMG says:

    …..” Possibly due to drug use or just using not enough brain cells, or both……”

    I got news for ya, Rusty. He was firing on all cylinders during this episode. He seldom attains such a high level of performance.

    Can ya’ say ‘Affirmative Action’? Sure. I knew ya’ could.

  7. Right of the People says:

    Did Holder actually graduate from law school?

    He and the other 99% of lawyers give the good lawyers a bad name.

  8. retire05 says:

    I hope y’all are appreciative of our Texas Republicans. Because if you are not, you damn well should be.

    It was Ted Poe (Tx-R) that caused Holder to fess up that he had never even read the Arizona bill that he has been bashing on every TV show that would have him and it was Lamar Smith (Tx-R) that gave us the most painful two minute video of an Attorney General of the United States since the days Janet Reno tried to cover her ass during the Congressional hearings on Waco. Thank you Congressman Smith for forcing the nation to see that Holder can’t even bring himself to say “radical Islam”.

    Meanwhile, it is coming to the surface how the General Services Administration, under the direction of the Obama administration, is paying the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, VA $582,000.00 of taxpayer money to house offices for the Census. If anyone is curious, Dar Al-Hijrah mosque is the same mosque where Al Awlaki, the American born Imam who has fled to Yemen, once preached to at least two of the 9-11 hijackers, the same mosque that was attended by not only Maj. Nidal Hassan (Fort Hood terrorist) but also the Times Square bomber and it was Al Awlaki that had such influence on the Christmas Day bomber.

    But hey, our DoJ must keep an eye on those TEA Partiers, because they are the real danger to this nation, right?

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      I hope y’all are appreciative of our Texas Republicans. Because if you are not, you damn well should be.

      Boy howdy.

  9. proreason says:

    It’s fascinating that people as pitifully stupid as Holder, Maxime Waters, and Barbara Boxer have absolutely no shame about revealing it in public,

    Wouldn’t you be humiliated to demonstrate such ignorence in front of the whole world? I would want to crawl in a hole.

    But they aren’e embarassed in the least.

    Apparently that’s what happens to your ego when you have never been allowed to fail in your life. You begin to believe that everything you say, no matter how nonsensical, is true.

    Obamy, of course, is the ultimate example. He not only is not embarassed, he is contemptuous of the people who are making fools of him. He mocks the very people who disclose his outrageous lies.

  10. canary says:

    Holder called American’s cowards for not discussing race issues?
    So, Holder is the coward, to afraid to talk about muslim issues.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »