All of the credit and none of the blame.

Predictably, Crazy-Assed Racist Redneck and the Redneckettes are all over the latest Islamojihadifarian terror scare, and wondering just what the hell is wrong with those of us who are not getting terrified so much as just getting old and jaded by all of this. But this latest hysteria brings up a ticklish question.

Apparently, as one after another evil, swarthy terrorist plot is thwarted, we are supposed to be boundlessly grateful to those courageous and tenacious authorities who manage to nip these schemes in the bud just in the nick of time. Yes, the most compelling proof of their successful tenacity is, of course, the utter lack of recent, actual attacks. ("Of course this elephant repellent is successful. You don't see any elephants around here, do you?")

So we're supposed to give these people all of the credit for our ongoing safety, but that inspires the obvious question, then: Are we then allowed to heap the blame on these folks when something does go horribly, horribly wrong and people end up dying?

The Bush administration is constantly crowing about how their dogged efforts to protect the American public have resulted in no actual terrorist attacks in, what is it now, almost five years? Of course, they'll conveniently forget about that bit of unpleasantness of September 11, 2001, which is, naturally, everyone else's fault.

So, the question stands: If these folks are constantly going on about how we should be grateful that they're protecting us, are they equally willing to take the blame and let the proper heads roll when/if they eventually fuck up? Or will that always be someone else's fault?

And why do I insist on asking such painfully rhetorical questions?