Replies

Agree? It would be difficult to agree with a document that so thoroughly intermingle animosity with naivete. If an event of similar magnitude impacted us during President Clinton's term clearly the country would have backed him equally in his efforts to prevent a recurrence. To think they wouldn't underestimates our ability to rise above the personal animosity felt towards the man, and also defies the quantitative polling data which emereged after his response to the USS Cole bombing. Unfortunately, it appears many of his diehard supporters from that time can't find it within themselves to do the same for President Bush now.

Unfortunately, it appears many of his diehard supporters from that time can't find it within themselves to do the same for President Bush now.

I was never a supporter of Bill Clinton. Everything I said about him and Janet Reno above was entirely sincere. I simply reserve the right to hold Bush to the same standards I held Clinton to.

If an event of similar magnitude impacted us during President Clinton's term clearly the country would have backed him equally in his efforts to prevent a recurrence.

Please excuse, but I have a REALLY TOUGH TIME believing that.

REALLY tough.

Considering you lost a family member in the atrocity of 9/11, I can understand your feelings about our security and your rather acerbic feelings towards someone who does not look upon such a move as the "Patriot" Act as a legitimate security measure.

I am indeed very sorry that you lost loved ones to the actions of the terrorists, and apologize if I seemed insensitive to that, but your primary dialogue with me on this board was to question the veracity of contributors to my site re: their OPINIONS on issues, as well as my "truth in advertising" as it were.

That doesn't make you any less deserving of condolences for your loss, but it might bring into better light that, with your reaction to Mr. Armitage's opinions on certain actions by our Administration and my reaction to your backhanded implication that those columnists on my site (who love America and ARE patriots) are something more sinister, emotions are getting rubbed pretty raw around here.

I don't blame Mr. Armitage for being cynical about the implementation of the "Patriot" Act. This idea was lying around for MONTHS (like from January!), with those supporting it just waiting for something like 9/11 to happen so that those who are looking to increase the power (and let's be frank, the possible ABUSE) of Federal Government could play upon the fears of someone exactly in your situation to cram it through without comment from the public, without hindrance from the President...and hell, without even READING it themselves.

And considering the Feds admitted they knew the 9/11 attack was being planned for quite some time, it's rather tough for me and others NOT to be cynical about This Magic Solution suddenly popping up as The Answer To All Our Problems. "We're from the government and we're here to help you", as the old joke goes.

I'm POSITIVE if President Clinton signed something like this under such circumstances, the red warning lights would have been flashing like Rudolf's nose on Christmas Eve 'round these parts.

As to the current conflict (or war, whatever you want to call it)...I say find the bastards who did this and who assisted them, put them down, and then bring our troops home. No "nation-building" aftermath, if you please.

I think we've discovered over the past few years that too many of these people we've assisted in the past usually wind up NOT appreciating it.

And we've got more important things to do at home than set up future, dangerous foreign ingrates into positions of power.