<p>Zoosermom (#19): I have a longer view: we did not win the Cold War in order to become like the Soviet Union. It is very chilling when “In the name of state security…” becomes the justification for everything, along with might/could/would threats. We have a President who now insists that he is above the law and doesn’t have to comply any time he thinks, in his judgment, the law is in conflict with his duties as commander in-chief. I could lead a Panzer division through that loophole. </p>
<p>This whole unfolding saga about warrantless surveillance of American civilians does make me laugh however. The gun nuts always amused me with their posturing about their guns being the check of last resort on intrusive government. The dumb ****s didn’t understand that the government doesn’t need armed men these days to control, direct, and surveil.</p>
<p>May Tom Tancredo run for President as an independent in 2008.</p>
<p>The Dad:<br>
I actually have some issues with Bush on national security as well. Some issues. Where it gets tough for me is that I do agree with him on some things and disagree on others. I have a hard time believing he is that serious about national security if he continues to support “amnesty” and not closing the borders. I can’t reconcile that contradiction.</p>
<p>Were you being sarcastic about Tom Tancredo (I don’t know you well enough to tell)?</p>
<p>“Well, I don’t respect Bush as President…Sexual predator? Hmmm, she was of legal age and he was married” Guess bribery, lying, covering up, is so much more acceptable"</p>
<p>I didn’t ask you to respect Bush. I didn’t equate Hillary with Bush. I indicated how I would actively choose to conduct myself in the event she wins the election. I am an American and I know that my party/candidate will not always win elections and when they don’t, I will be gracious about it and continue to be a good and respectful citizen. Yes, I absolutely believe that Clinton is a sexual predator. I believe Paula Jones and I think there is quite a bit of truth to other stories as well. I’ve been on the receiving end of men like Bill Clinton and I recognize the signs (yes, I’ve met him). Guess you don’t see the Clinton admin and cronies as having been guilty of lying, bribery, covering up? Lots of convictions and reports say otherwise. Lying under oath for the purpose of impinging upon the rights of a fellow citizen is a very big deal to me.</p>
<p>" If I didn’t dislike her poiltically so much, I still wouldn’t like to see her elected president because of her husband."</p>
<p>I will never vote for the wife of a mass murderer of children. (I’d vote for GW first, but that wonderful opportunity has passed me by. ;)</p>
<p>But I do look forward to the opportunity for the Repubs to nominate an adulterer who carried on his affair for over a year in the Mayor’s Mansion while his wife and kid were living under the same roof. Now that’s Hot! :)</p>
<p>It’s just too easy to sit back and *****, complain and attack our President, or our government representatives or our laws and policies. I don’t always agree with much of what our govt is or isn’t doing but I just have two questions for those posting on this thread…</p>
<ol>
<li>Did you vote? if not sit back and shut up.</li>
<li>What are your suggestions or what have you done to ensure that we protect America? Some of you may have to imagine we are at war against global terrorist entities intent on killing you, your family, your beliefs and your freedoms.</li>
</ol>
<p>I occassionally look backward and wonder how it would all have turned out if the 2000 election had been Bradley against McCain, instead of Bush against Gore.</p>
<p>“But I do look forward to the opportunity for the Repubs to nominate an adulterer who carried on his affair for over a year in the Mayor’s Mansion while his wife and kid were living under the same roof. Now that’s Hot!”</p>
<p>As opposed to Clinton who did what? Oh yeah, carried on an affair in the White House while his wife and kid were living under the same roof. While I don’t condone Rudy’s actions (as I said, I didn’t vote for him the second time), I don’t think that behavior is even in the same ballpark as Clinton’s. No, not Monica. The unwelcome sexual advances of which I think there were many. To say the least.</p>
<p>Hardknox, I just don’t see that existential threat of terrorism that you do, and instead believe that instilling extreme fear in the populace was exactly the Bush administration plan all along. With the fear, the administration could advance its own agenda, which it has succeeded to do, although not without a lot of bumps in the road, since it appears most Americans don’t particularly appreciate being lied to or manipulated like that after all.</p>
<p>"It’s just too easy to sit back and *****, complain and attack our President, or our government representatives or our laws and policies. I don’t always agree with much of what our govt is or isn’t doing but I just have two questions for those posting on this thread…</p>
<ol>
<li>Did you vote? if not sit back and shut up.</li>
<li>What are your suggestions or what have you done to ensure that we protect America? Some of you may have to imagine we are at war against global terrorist entities intent on killing you, your family, your beliefs and your freedoms."</li>
</ol>
<p>In fact, I did vote and have in every election since I became eligible to do so 32 years ago. I have voted Republican in several of those elections. I voted for Ronald Reagan (twice) as well as George Bush Senior. That being said I would vote for ANYBODY the Democrats ran before I would have voted for W. I consider him and his entire administration to be wreckless and in fact dangerous. He and his cabal frighten me to no end. I DO NOT feel safer than I felt on 9/10.</p>
<p>ZooserMom, at least Clinton was screwing the country only one person at a time. </p>
<p>HardKnox, one of the most morally bankrupt sleights of hand that the Bush administration has done–and I admit, there are several contenders for this honor–is to palm a card and pass off Iraq & Saddam Hussein as a response to 9/11. Invading Iraq has the “direct action” “feel good” simplicty that the doofus in-chief admires so much but has, at a net evaluation, made America <em>less</em> safe. Iraq had approximately nil to do with 9/11 and now we’re producing terrorists at a faster rate than we’re killing them, sacrificing civil liberties at home in the name of national security, creating rather than ameliorating instability in the Middle East, etc., as Iraq continues its slo-mo train wreck towards becoming an Islamic Republic. (That will be virulently anti-Israeli…I’m waiting for the moment this becomes clear to Americans and they collectively realize that we’ve fought, died, and spent hundreds of billions for this.) I used to think that we had a choice of two out of three in Iraq: stable, democratic, pro-American. I’m now down to one out of three. And on some days I wonder even about that. Hubris.</p>
<p>WharfRat, interesting typo: if only the W administration were wreckless. They’re littering the political and diplomatic landscape with wrecks, left and right.</p>
<p>"I just don’t see that existential threat of terrorism that you do, and instead believe that instilling extreme fear in the populace was exactly the Bush administration plan all along. "</p>
<p>For me, personally, being stranded on Manhattan on 9/11, having lost so many close to me, and living in one of the hardest hit communities instilled fear in me and my family, absent any help from the Bush administration.</p>
<p>“Hardknox, I just don’t see that existential threat of terrorism that you do,”</p>
<p>Allmusic, some people are harder to wake up from their stupor than others. Back in FDR’s days there were many things that could/should have woken up the American populace prior to Pearl Harbor, but they finally woke up on that fateful December day. </p>
<p>We should have woken up after the first Trade Center bombing, but didn’t. We should have woken up with the subsequent series of bombings around the world directed at us, but didn’t. Finally, on 9/11 most of us woke up, but, because of the nature of this warfare-by-terror versus massed armies, unfortunately many people are being lulled back to sleep. These are the same people who will be demanding an investigation as to why its government did not do enough to protect it after the next terror attack. Hopefully this attack will be something as relatively “benign” as a subway attack. However, if the experts are correct, it will be more likely a nuclear or biological atack with far more victims than 9/11.</p>
<p>Well zoosermom, our actions post 9/11 have increased terrorism and anti-American sentiment world-wide to unprecedented levels. Whatever justification people had for wanting revenge aftrer 9/11 (and I had a friend on AA 11, and was fighting mad for awhile) has long been lost in the mired mess we have created.</p>
<p>The threat of terrorism is much greater now than it was,e ven right after 9/11. The US invasion of Iraq has turned that nation into a breeding ground for terrorists, which is nothing short of insane.</p>
<p>So, it seems that people who fear terrorism ought to look to the source.</p>