Turn the blame on Clinton around.

[Hailtothechimp]

The terrorists knew that they couldn't successfully attack America so long as Clinton was in power. They tried (WTC 1993, Millenium plot at LAX) but failed. So they waited.

And then they saw the chaos of the 2000 Florida recount. They saw an opening when a new president came in, without the legitimacy that Al Gore would have had (a half-million votes worth of legitimacy). So they saw their opening, began planning, and went for it. Successfully.

So it was not Clinton's fault at all. But ABC won't tell that story. So we should instead.

[ERF]

1. Just like the economy, I just don't think POTUS has that much

direct effect on how well the responsible agencies do their job protecting America on the ground.

Clinton might have told his people it was a priority, Bush might have have told his people the same. Neither of them worked in intelligence before they were elected and neither ran on a platform that even mentioned it before 9/11.

By the time a President, having listened to his advirsors, would give an order that would affect on the ground operations it would take a very long time.

The terrorists who planned and carried out 9/11 did not care who was President. They would be terrorists regardless and would have found a way.

The difference is that Clinton didn't take any actions on the world stage that exponentially multiplied that ability of those committed terrorists to find new recruits, a wonderful live battlefield to train them and daily footage of American troops beating on Muslims.

No individual is at fault for 9/11 other than bin Laden. It was a systemic failure.

[papau]

3. Clinton forced daily WH meetings on Terrorist status with reports to him -

Bush ended those meetings.

Result was millenium plot stopped under Clinton, 911 occurs under Bush.

On economy, deficit moving to zero is a long range requirement for low interest rate assumptions for the long term in many board rooms considering new investment and trying to see if the investment returns more than the hurdle rate - where the hurdle rate is the long term expected rate plus profit needs. If it doesn't the company is better off without that loan - or if they have cash - is better off putting it in bonds. The low current interest rates are the result of corporate cash being put into the purchase of bonds rather than investment, plus the Asian countries buying bonds to keep the exchange rate down as they exchange higher interest earnings for in country job growth.

The Bush corporate profit growth has been via cutting the wage portion of the GDP by 10% - not by internal growth funded and incented by capitalism.

[ProfessorGAC]

5. Good Call, papau

That whole "president really doesn't impact the economy" nonsense irks me, too!

It's simply untrue. Fiscal policy has a massive, and mathematically provable impact on economic growth, employment levels, and maintaining control over inflationary pressure.

EVERY president in the modern age has had a direct effect on the economy WHILE THEY WERE IN OFFICE!

Thanks again.
The Professor

[papau]

7. No problem - I know you can't be everywhere so I try to fill in as needed!

:-)

[Toots]

6. Not true at all

Clinton said many times that terrorism was the biggest issue of the day and worked diligently on the matter. He had a non-partisan team put together to gather all the facts about terrorism and present them with recommendations. This took over two years to assemble the material and come up with recommendations. It was called the Hart-Rudman Report and was placed on Bush*'s desk January 20th as he took office. Bush* discarded the report off hand and put all efforts into establishing his "Star Wars" program. To this day Bush* has not read or acknowledged that report. Clinton held Daily meetings on terrorism and told the incoming Bush* Administration that it was the most important issue facing America. Bush* laughed and made some remark about hitting a camel in the butt with a missile. On September 10th the Justice Department (under Ashcroft) submitted their annual budget and all funding for terrorism had been cut from that budget. Terrorism just was not considered important to the Bush* Administration and in fact anything that Clinton worked on or thought to be important was quickly discarded by Bush* who could not bear to accept anything from Clinton. You need to learn a little more about the facts of the matter before making such assumptions as you have IMO.

[ProfessorGAC]

2. Actually There Is A Tangential Element In This Too

The "opening" you describe was exacerbated by the Bush Mob's saber rattling, treaty busting, and insularity. The violent radicals that become terrorists, i think, saw the fall of 2001 as "their time", since the United States was making a lot of world players angry, even long time allies. So, they may have felt that the rest of the world hated the U.S. as much as they did, and they would get sympathy and support for the attack.

They obviously miscalculated, momunmentally. But, if the idiots in the administration had not spent 6 months angering every other country on earth, the terrorists may not have rushed to attack. That would have given intelligence even more time to track and crack.
The Professor

[tinfoilinfor2005]

4. There it is there.

Kicked and recommended.