Then I guess the question would be, did Napolitano have say in the right wing extremist report, and was it after the decision to stop using the term "terrorist/terrorism" in favor of "man-caused disasters". If so, I think it's a fair criticism.

A week or so ago, John Stewart made fun of the newspeak terrorism term, roasting Obama's budget director with repeated clips of his use of the term--the night before the guy was supposed to be on the show--where it was not discussed.

By the way, not that there could be a good one, but the stated rationale is stupid. Terrorism is what their bad guys do. The politics of fear is what our guys do (did) in response.

I think Timothy McVeigh was a right wing terrorist. I think abortion bombers are right wing terrorists. I think various environmental groups are terrorists. I'm sure there are many more I just don't want to think that hard.

I am not offended by the use of the word terrorism in these reports, as it applies (or could). I just find it sickening that the word terrorism is acceptable unless we are talking about foreign groups, then it is taboo, as I think the are more "man caused events" related to Islamofacism than there are abortion clinic bombings.

And as I've read that Napolitano has tried to restict interviewers to one question regarding the report, it seems as if it is quite the touchy subject to her.

I agree with scaeagles.

Too bad Rush Limbaugh didn't OD on drugs.

There was a "man-caused disaster" in my bathroom this morning. Some would call it terrorism, I suppose. I call it burritos for dinner.

Arlen Specter's becoming a Democrat.