It is conservatives who are emboldening the enemy

It's out there. It's very, very faint right now, but it's trying to get louder. That sound you hear is the recognition, even among some in the media, that screaming "The terrorists are gonna getcha!" is not exactly the way to project strength and courage in the face of a threat. Getting a boner over an attempted terrorist attack for political gain is not the way to show how much you love your country. Hoping for another attack because you think it'll help you regain power is what traitors do, not what patriots do. Jonathan Alter advocates that Barack Obama meet with Dick Cheney -- not to find common ground, but to tell him in no uncertain terms that his remarks are traitorous and to shut the fuck up. Chris Matthews chastises Politico for serving as the official media outlet of Cheney's ravings. And the more unhinged the right gets, the more they look like fearmongers and less like national security experts...and the more their lust for absolute power demonstrates that they WANT terrorists to succeed. They WANT death on a mass scale here in this country. They WANT these things because they think it will bring them back to power.

Who's emoboldening terrorists? Who's egging them on? It isn't liberals and it isn't President Obama. It's the very right wing that fancies itself to be the "real patriots":

As I noted yesterday, it is true that one of the goals of terrorism is to elicit a wild over-reaction from the target government, resulting in greater publicity and a larger pool of potential recruits for the terrorists’ cause, and so any response has to be balanced against that. But the idea that “the strategic goals of al Qaeda” are better advanced by more security theater at American airports than they were by, say, inducing the United States to invade and occupy two Muslim countries and engage in a global campaign of kidnapping and torture, is just ridiculous on its face.

But this is largely beside the point, because conservatives like Kristol, Hume, and Doan aren’t genuinely (or at least primarily) interested in analyzing threats and policies to deal with them, they’re interested in promoting a specific, and politically advantageous, narrative about the nature of those threats. And apparently, the possibility of those threats serving as Al Qaeda propaganda is a price they’re willing to pay in order to achieve that political advantage.

And that's what nutballs like Peter King and Jim DeMint and the rest of these assholes need to be told...repeatedly....everytime they open their idiotic pieholes.