Granted, they were probably lax. The issue is still NOT an emergency situation requiring the grounding of AA's entire MD-80 fleet. Cabling problems rarely contribute to airplanes falling out of the sky.
Once the issue was discovered by/at AA, an agreement to work with the FAA to comply with the cabling tie requirement at the next maintenance cycle would have been acceptable under most circumstances. As ASOC noted, the FAA probably cozied up to SWA and let them circumvent too many inspections. In order to regain their credibility, they needed to come down hard on the next target - AA.
So, somebody had to take the blame for the complacency at the FAA. If the order was issued in 2006, as you noted, why is it AA's fault that it wasn't done before now? The ball is still in the FAA's court because they have the responsibility of spot checking to ensure that the inpections are being properly performed. Evidently, there are some FAA inspectors who were "pencil-whipping" the paperwork instead of doing what we pay them for.
FAA designated inspectors are not necessarily FAA emplyees. In many cases, they work for the airline, aircraft manufacturer, or maintenance contractor.
It is the applicant's (read: airline's) responsibility to ensure that their inspections conform to the required standards. This is akin to blaming the test monitor because the student failed to pass the test.
At any rate, we disagree. If you'd like to continue the discussion, I'd be happy to, although I doubt either of us will sway the other. :-)
The FAA has the responsibility to verify via a paper trail as to how the work is going to be performed and signatures of approved field personnel stating that the work will be performed as documented, thus assuring responsibility is placed for work not being performed as approved.
It isn't their job to visually inspect the work although it is their option to do so.