Where to begin...?
This writer’s an idiot. How can he say that we’ve been safer under Bush? He shows the 3,000 dead in the 9/11 attacks but “dismisses” them, I’m assuming as inconsequential. He refuses to admit that Bush had been President since February 2001. 9/11 happened under his watch.
Where to begin...?
How many times were we attacked in the previous 30 years?
Which administration and Congress deballed our intelligence services and our military making such attacks not only possible but rather easy to accomplish?
And finally, why are you so damn ignorant?
ZOT......libturd on board
I think you’re missing the implicit point that much of this analysis is about if we’re safer or not applies to post-911.
People often use the “are we safer argument” in the context of pro or against the Iraq war.
Once all modern-day liberals are dead and the history books are being written, the Bush post-911 era will be noted as a safe period for the homeland BECAUSE of the Republicans.
9/11 happened under his watch.
9/11 took 6 years to plan.
Wow, with thoughts like that, you must have “do not resuscitate” tattooed to your forehead.
Oh, yeah, Bush did it. Well, my FRiend, we haven’t been attacked since that day, so what’s the beef?