Pork 1, Antiterrorism 0 - New York Times

Pork 1, Antiterrorism 0 - New York Times:

There appear to be serious problems with the department's evaluation process. Rather than having impartial antiterrorism experts make recommendations, it relied on anonymous 'peer reviewers' recommended by governors, mayors and local homeland security departments. The panels appear to have been too focused on politics, and not enough on safety. The resistance to financing operating costs, like police overtime, ignores the fact that day-to-day groundwork does the most to combat terrorism.

Some of the specifics of the decision process are downright bizarre. New York City's evaluation found that it had no 'national monuments or icons.' The department concedes that omitting the Statute of Liberty was an 'oversight,' but it still seems unaware that to many would-be terrorists, the biggest American icon of all is simply — New York.

Typical of BushCo to ignore the lessons of the past (even the recent past) and put its money where its mouthes are, so to speak. It's easier to understand their dissing New York (hey, we're in the Northeast and you know how we vote), but D.C.? I guess they figure Cheney's bunker is unassailable, so why bother spending more on the city? Maybe the Capital would have fared better if W's approval ratings weren't in the sewer. The Repugs probably see the writing on the wall and don't see the need to protect a lost cause. Just wait until next year!