Who's responsible for DHS cutbacks? (all together now...CLINTON!)

[brooklynite]

THE FEDS' FOUL
CLINTONITE SECURITY GOALS

June 6, 2006 -- LOST in the outrage over Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff's risible finding that New York has "zero national monuments or icons" is the real reason for New York's funding loss: a fatal confusion over what homeland-security funds are actually for.

...snip...

The idea, in DHS's view, is that each city has a finite need for such equipment - you can only have so many chemical suits. Once a city has bought its equipment, or trained its people, it's done, and the next year, some other city should receive a chance.

...snip...

This fundamental misunderstanding is curious, because Gotham's approach to homeland security closely mirrors the Bush administration's stated foreign-policy approach to the war on radical Islam: Act now abroad to prevent attacks, rather than act later to respond to them. The DHS's philosophy, conversely, is more like the Clinton administration's: Wait for an attack and then respond.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/69606.htm

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Yep, and Clinton's worked and Bush's doesn't.