Comments on: Obama’s Sept. 10th Mindset

National Review Online: The Terrorism Debate Is One McCain Should Welcome, And Win

[talkingham]

The "Editors" wrote this stupid piece and were so ashamed no one would claim individual credit. Guess it takes a village of idiots to write an article this stupid.

We all know 911 casts doubt on all human knowledge before that date which Bush and his cronies ALLOWED to happen. I remember in July before 911 there was all this chatter about possible terrorist attacks in the media. What did bush and his FBI do. Nothing. Reports from field agents about mysterious flight training efforts by numerous "terrorists" were "not passed up the chain" from the field agents. Absurd.

No air cover over the Pentagon 20 minutes after the 2nd flight hits the trade towers. Absurd!

In fact, no real air cover at all on the East coast that day. Who was minding the store? Bush''s Saudi buddies and their favorite son Bin Laden.

If what the President has had since 911 is a post 911 mind set, then we need a new mind set. He can go back to reading my pet goat.

[juliemd]

What a bunch of B.S. I''m still not sure why this National Review propaganda is on the CBS website...trying to be balanced??? Try again, with something of substance...

[tbweb]

The scandal ridden sorry performance, some would even say disgraceful performance of Republicans during the last 7 years who at one point controlled all branches of Government have only themselves to blame for the success of a relatively unknown first term Senator from Illinois that hardly many Americans even know or heard of but don''t seem to care! The fact that Americans can get this excited about an inexperienced unknown like Senator Obama and give him millions of dollars to boot in record contributions is an indictment against the bad taste Republicans have left in so many American mouths. Sen. Obama''s success has more to do with what Republicans have done wrong for the past 7 years than it does with what Sen. Obama has done right!

[andor3]

just more of the usual NRO blather: continue to do what fails, because it is embarrassing to admit you could do better if you change. And deny the power of the fundamental principles that made America great.

These people ultimately want to weaken America and surrender our freedoms.

[joyous88]

we should all have a Sept 10th mindset,

the other one is insane, insane mcSAME

[it_oldtimer]

So what should our top priorities REALLY be? Terrorism is waaaaaaaay down on the list somewhere, statistically speaking.

Many neo-cons claim that the statistics below are only true because of all the massive government expansion and spending now devoted to fight terrorists. If that were true, those "success stories" would be trumpeted all over the press -- but the sad truth is, for all the money spent, there simply have been no victories to crow about. Nobody seems to be finding any terrorists to arrest or thwart.

Our borders are still as porous as a sieve. Illegals come and go as they please. The DHS is an incredibly expensive joke; they never seem to catch anybody doing anything wrong - their only function seems to be driving commercial airline customers away. You can hardly blame them for not catching any terrorists though, if there are actually none available to be caught.

So, take the number of terrorists apprehended, and evil plots thwarted, plus the number of successful attacks since 9/11, of course, and what have you got?

You have a clear picture of how the neocons have taken one single very lucky attack and blown it up into a never-ending global war, which is exactly what they''re hoping for.

I, for one, am just not buying it anymore.

[it_oldtimer]

In the USA:

More people die of starvation than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die for lack of adequate health care than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die of spousal abuse than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die of prescription drug abuse than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die in car accidents than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die alcohol-related deaths than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan than die in terrorist attacks.

More people die trying to cross the street than die in terrorist attacks.

I could go on and on and on, but the point should be clear enough: just about anything you care to name takes more lives than terrorist attacks ever have, or ever will.

[zendigity]

Why is it the GOP continues to use fear as a weapon to control the people...let''s put things into perspective for just a moment.

Sure, Sept. 11 was terrible, but quite honestly more Americans have died fighting the war on terror than they did that day...more than that, every year more American''s die from:
Car Accidents
Heart Attacks
Cancer
DWI
Mother Nature

Stop with the fear mongering...these old Nazi tricks only work on the ignorant and stupid.

[ubrew12]

NRO: "Without the prospect of a vigorous response to acts of war, the enemy continued to attack. The result was 9/11." During the Gulf War in ''91, the U.S. opened military bases in Saudi Arabia, birthplace of Muhammed. Al-Qaida and other muslim extremist groups IMMEDIATELY threatened consequences. Before then, the U.S. had never been attacked by Al-Qaida, but THAT was when the attacks began, and they DIDN''T stop until the U.S. closed those bases after 9-11. GW Bush stopped the attacks by CAVING to Al-Qaida''s central demand. Our killing 300,000 Iraqi''s was for another reason, one have nothing to do with prevention or terror. The NRO editors have been so 180 degrees wrong on these issues for so long, its a wonder they have the chutzpah to keep publishing.

[gkc99]

Sounds like more of the usual product from the Nasty Repug Orif*ce.

Probably some more of the genius of Viktor Davis Handjob.

[taxguydave]

The conservative media likes to ignore that:

September 11, 2001, happened on Bush''s watch.

Clinton had been actively pursuing al-Qaeda, even bombing their camps.

In his first week in office, Bush rescinded Clinton''s executive order directing the CIA to find and kill Bin Laden.

Those are just a few of the highlights. Gee, it''s almost as if Bush and Cheney wanted it to happen.

[quatermass2]

"It told an enemy, so committed to killing Americans that its operatives were willing to sacrifice themselves in the effort, that the world%u2019s only superpower would respond to atrocities with subpoenas and indictments."

Yes, that **WAS** the George W. Bush approach when he got the briefing "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S.", wasn''t it? And where the hell is Bin Laden now? Did we "take him out"? No, the Chimp-in-Chief is on record as saying "he''s not that important". So don''t start THAT kind of b.s. talk.

Here''s something that makes more sense:

"As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan."

Let''s heasr more of THAT.