Feel safer with Bush?

[JoeChalupa]

I'll take Kerry's approach which he has made very clear that he will defend America to the fullest extent and that is all I can ask for.
Either way, I won't be losing any sleep after tomorrow night.

[Hook Dem]

"He had just started his term at the time"

Remember how the Repugs spun their taking of office, the transition would be all "business-like", "meetings start/stop on time" (I take this spin as shrub being so "content-free" all he could do was insist on "form", and his first secy of commerce confirmed that after he left the cabinet), "hitting the ground running", etc, ad nauseam?

Well, 9/11 was almost 1 ing year into shrub/ head term as commander-in-chief and primary guarantor of national security. 9/11 is shrub/ head's turd and their turd alone.

WTC/93 was on Clinton's watch, and THAT was the wake up call.

Remember when Clinton shot a cruise into Afghanistan to get OBL? I remember thinking "WTF is all that about?"

The outgoing Dem's warned shrub/ head about OBL, but since nothing of any value could possible come from the Dems, it was ignored. The Repugs had bigger fish to fry, like tax cuts for the rich.

I'm sure the complete story of the White House, CIA/FBI/NSC actions in the months before 9/11 has not been told.

That little 9/11 tidbit about the FBI agent who wrote a report that was extremely prescient about these foreigners wanting to learn how to fly but not learn how to take off and land? They want you to believe that was the ONLY insight anywhere in all of the FBI/CIA/NSC.

The spin we've heard, and that obviously we Americans of good will want to believe, is that it was impossible to have prevented 9/11. shrub/ head cia/fbi/nsc absolutlely insist that "possible to prevent" be unthinkable, beyond our imaginations. ie, shrub/ head absolutely want us to believe that the 9/11 was so exceptional so that we give shrub/ head a pass on it.

I remember sitting watching CNN, before the first tower fell, thinking "somebody has really ed up bad to allow this to happen" CIA/FBI/NSC have $50B or so, year in and year out, to prevent this . What the were they doing? Reminisicing about the good old days with the Russians?

But this general denying of any responsiblity is typical shrub. "we weren't responsible for (the failures before) 9/11 (it was Clinton), but we're responsible for the wonderful non-9/11's that haven't happened since. The want it both ways, I'm not giving it to them.

shrub/ head have the unlimited brazeness and mendacity to convict KERRY as guilty for a future, imagined 9/11, while shrub/ head are 100% innocent of the past, real 9/11? GMAFB

ie, my point is that if they want to stick Kerry as guility of some future 9/11, I stick shrub/ head with the guilt of the past 9/11.

You are one bitter individual filled with hatred and if anyone is a " head", it is you!

[Clandestino]

I'll take Kerry's approach which he has made very clear that he will defend America to the fullest extent and that is all I can ask for.
Either way, I won't be losing any sleep after tomorrow night.

yeah, i won't be losing sleep either, but i'll be pissed if kerry's wins!

and kerry has said a lot, but done other things.. you can't take the man at his word... you know that...

it is going to interesting tomorrow... all the networks have said they won't be making early predictions this year...

[JoeChalupa]

Bush has also said somethings and didn't follow through...remember, they are both politicians.

[Marcus Bryant]

I'll take Kerry's approach which he has made very clear that he will defend America to the fullest extent

...just as Clinton and those presidents before him did. Kerry still doesn't seem to have grasped that things have changed since 9/11. Waiting to be attacked again before acting is not an anti-terrorist policy I find appealing.

[JoeChalupa]

I have not been scared into believing that.
That is just me and I only speak for myself.
I've never heard Kerry say, "I will wait for an attack before protecting America."

But I'm done.

[Marcus Bryant]

Kerry has said a number of times that he would not hesitate to defend America when attacked.

We've been attacked.

[spurster]

Utter BS. No future president is going back to any past weak approach to terrorism after 9/11. Even Bush changed from "tax cuts will solve all your problems" to focusing on terrorism. He made major mistakes IMO, but I can't fault him for effort. Remember that Bush was equally weak on terrorism before 9/11.

[Marcus Bryant]

"BS"? Kerry's stance is quite clear to those who actually bother to listen instead of hating Bu ler 24/7.

[boutons]

"hook dem" advances the dialogue and enlightens us all.

When shrub/ head conduct themselves like leaders of the country, then I will call them by their proper names.

[gophergeorge]

Joe!

Kerry didn't even want to punish Libya for the Berlin Disco bombing!

It will be open season on the US of A....

God help us if he wins....

[boutons]

"Kerry didn't even want to punish Libya for the Berlin Disco bombing!"

Why didn't Saint Ronnie,

1) as soon as he had the chance as President and

2) had the US Embasssy hostages back (a luxury Jimmie didn't have), bomb the out of Iran? bomb the out of Libya?

And why don't faux Macho Men shrub/ head do it now as reactive, not pre-emptive, attack? Is there some kind of statute of limitations on the act of war of invading the U.S. soil, of murdering disco dancers, or airline passengers?

[Useruser666]

"He had just started his term at the time"

Remember how the Repugs spun their taking of office, the transition would be all "business-like", "meetings start/stop on time" (I take this spin as shrub being so "content-free" all he could do was insist on "form", and his first secy of commerce confirmed that after he left the cabinet), "hitting the ground running", etc, ad nauseam?

Well, 9/11 was almost 1 ing year into shrub/ head term as commander-in-chief and primary guarantor of national security. 9/11 is shrub/ head's turd and their turd alone.

WTC/93 was on Clinton's watch, and THAT was the wake up call.

Remember when Clinton shot a cruise into Afghanistan to get OBL? I remember thinking "WTF is all that about?"

The outgoing Dem's warned shrub/ head about OBL, but since nothing of any value could possible come from the Dems, it was ignored. The Repugs had bigger fish to fry, like tax cuts for the rich.

I'm sure the complete story of the White House, CIA/FBI/NSC actions in the months before 9/11 has not been told.

That little 9/11 tidbit about the FBI agent who wrote a report that was extremely prescient about these foreigners wanting to learn how to fly but not learn how to take off and land? They want you to believe that was the ONLY insight anywhere in all of the FBI/CIA/NSC.

The spin we've heard, and that obviously we Americans of good will want to believe, is that it was impossible to have prevented 9/11. shrub/ head cia/fbi/nsc absolutlely insist that "possible to prevent" be unthinkable, beyond our imaginations. ie, shrub/ head absolutely want us to believe that the 9/11 was so exceptional so that we give shrub/ head a pass on it.

I remember sitting watching CNN, before the first tower fell, thinking "somebody has really ed up bad to allow this to happen" CIA/FBI/NSC have $50B or so, year in and year out, to prevent this . What the were they doing? Reminisicing about the good old days with the Russians?

But this general denying of any responsiblity is typical shrub. "we weren't responsible for (the failures before) 9/11 (it was Clinton), but we're responsible for the wonderful non-9/11's that haven't happened since. The want it both ways, I'm not giving it to them.

shrub/ head have the unlimited brazeness and mendacity to convict KERRY as guilty for a future, imagined 9/11, while shrub/ head are 100% innocent of the past, real 9/11? GMAFB

ie, my point is that if they want to stick Kerry as guility of some future 9/11, I stick shrub/ head with the guilt of the past 9/11.

Boutons, I can't debate, you because to me you make no sense in your arguements. Maybe if you start calling Bush, Bush, and Chaney, Chaney it would help clear things up. I see only hate in your words and no coherency.

Remember when Clinton shot a cruise into Afghanistan to get OBL? I remember thinking "WTF is all that about?"

I do remember that. Your critisisms for Bush about missing Osama fall flat when Clinton had done the same thing before. And you blame Bush for 9/11 when Clinton had just tried to kill him. Do you not think that pissed off Osama? I find fault in some of the things Bush has done. There is plenty there to find. I don't have to stretch the truth or push absolutely ridiculous accusations.

[JoeChalupa]

"BS"? Kerry's stance is quite clear to those who actually bother to listen instead of hating Bu ler 24/7.

I have been listening and he has made it clear that he will defend America.

And I agree that Bush was weak on terrorism before 9/11.

[bigzak25]

And I agree that Bush was weak on terrorism before 9/11.

so you, and anyone else that wants to chime in, would have supported attacks on afghanistan prior to 9/11???

[Marcus Bryant]

I have been listening and he has made it clear that he will defend America.

..."when attacked".

[JoeChalupa]

Like I said. I'll sleep soundly if Kerry is elected.
Looks like you'll be the one flip-flopping in his bed.
Not me.
Don't forget that Bush didn't do anthing against terrorism until we were attacked.

[Marcus Bryant]

Bush has since then. Kerry's approach is definitely still pre-9/11.

[JoeChalupa]

The bottom line is that each of us will make our own decisions and let's just leave it at that.
I'm simply not going to be scared into voting for Bush.

[JoeChalupa]

But would he have if not for 9/11?

That is a question that cannot be answered any more than your questions about Kerry.

[boutons]

For those of you who are so say your are pro-military, can't you join with me in lamenting the waste of 1100+ military lives in Iraq, the many more 1000's of US military without limbs, spinal cords, faces, or mental health for years to come?

Those of you who are pro-humanity, join with me in lamenting the death of 10's of 1000's of innocent Iraqis (at current counts for each number) by the completely senseless, bogus, counter-productive war started by shrub/ head in the name of the USA?

On the single but humongous issue of Iraq alone, shrub/ head have forfeited all claims to respect, credibility, and right to represent the USA on the world stage.

btw, I can call somebody shrub/ head without hating them.

Nor do I fault the US military, top to bottom, for the Iraq quaqmire. I thank them every day for their contribution. They are just folllowing orders, as they are conracted and sworn to do. But as commander-in-chief, shrub has criminally violated his side of that contract by sending our military into totally unnecessary war, risking, and losing, their lives for absolutely nothing.

[Spurminator]

But would he have if not for 9/11?

Would Tim Duncan have been a great basketball player if not for Hurricane Hugo? Is that a factor in contract negotiations?

[Marcus Bryant]

Gee, how about when you are lamenting the humanity of it all you think first about placing a little blame with Saddam Hussein?

[Nbadan]

i don't ever remember hearing about a memo that was so specific...

Do some research on Sibel Edmounds and why the Bush Administration wants to try and keep her quiet even to the point of going back and re-classifying her testimony as a National Security secret after it had been in the press.

You'll be amazed at what Ms. Edmounds has to say.

[Nbadan]

so you, and anyone else that wants to chime in, would have supported attacks on afghanistan prior to 9/11???

I had been advocating attacking Afghanistan and ursuping the Taliban since they knocked down those two giant Buda's, well before 911. They're disregard for human culture, history and their treatment of women alone was enough to justify an Invasion. I just think we should have stayed there and finished the job.