So the 9/11 Commission released its report today. Nothing horribly earth-shattering, but lots and lots of recommendations. We'll see if anything gets done, and if it does, it probably won't be anything effective.

The Commission put blame on pretty much everyone, which is many ways is good. The thing is, they not only spread the blame around but wholly diluted it in many ways. Some Lots of people need to have their asses kicked around if we're ever going to have any hopes of doing a decent job of combating terrorism (both in terms of reaction as well as prevention), but we're probably never going to have any of those hopes.

I did find it kind of interesting that so much emphasis was put on actions that congress needs to take. Not like it should come as a huge shock, but most of the talk up to this point has been about the Bush and Clinton administrations as well as intelligence agencies. I'm all for everyone getting a piece of the action, even though, again, I doubt much will actually get done.

Speaking of the Clinton administration, many on the right are hailing this report as a victory in Clinton-bashing. Claiming that there were eight years of Clinton but only eight months of Bush prior to 9/11. This is true. With as much of a Clinton fan as I am, I have always been on the forefront of placing plenty of blame on Clinton - as well as all prior administrations - for fostering the environment that led us to 9/11. Clinton and his people fucked up, Bush and his people fucked up, everyone fucked up.

But you know what? I seem to remember a Republican congress for many of those Clinton years. Yes, Clinton was at the top, but congress during most of Clinton's days was by no means the President's puppet (unlike some other congresses we can talk about). So yes, Clinton still shares a lot of the blame, but where was the Republican congress all those years to make things right, eh?

Speaking of the right, I was watching O'Reilly tonight. Now, the 9/11 Commission's report was, ostensibly, about September 11th. As yet, ol' Bill somehow made the report into being all about Iraq. More specifically, how the report completely validates our going in there in the first place. Yeah, of course, there was a lot of Iraq-related stuff in the report, but O'Reilly really did his best to make that the focus of the discussion. That's okay, though - he's fair & balanced. He still hasn't decided who he's voting for this year since, in his own words, he's open to being persuaded by both sides. Right. I just can't wait to see what Hannity and Colmes has to say about the report.

"President Bush said he welcomed the report..."

I like how Bush "welcomes" everything. He welcomed the addition of John Edwards to the Democratic ticket. He welcomes the 9/11 report. You know, the report that comes from the commission he tried to keep from happening in the first place.

Hey George: fuck you.

Regardless of what happens, I would imagine that Dennis Hastert will continue his ridiculous calls to keep the report from being turned into a "political football" this year. If anyone can explain to me what exactly in the fuck that means, I'd appreciate it. Listen, Dennis, just leave the football metaphors to Jack Kemp, okay? Other than the bullshit snowball con job that is supply-side economics, those metaphors are all that Kemp seems to be good for.

In the end, it's impressive that the Commission not only got together, but that they were able to get a report put together despite all the delays and stonewalling. As to whether or not we'll do anything with the report remains to be seen. We all know just how much I'm expecting to see get done.