Bush kept us safe? Really?

[edhopper]

The last gasp of the Bush apologists is that after 9/11 (yeah, ONLY the worst attack on American soil, but, you know that was early on) he has "kept us safe".
I have one question. When was that. I don't recall any big press report of a deterred attack. And given this Administrations unashamed PR, I doubt that we would not have heard about it.
Richard Clarke writes very well about this;
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/08/2009-01-08_president_bush_saved_us_lives_thats_only.html

His legacy should be one of complete and unmitigated failure, without a single bright note.

[leftyclimber]

1. We're not part of his "us."

"Us" is him and his cronies. To him, America is him and his cronies.

Which is why we need to make sure that no one ever forgets the damage this man has done and that he and his cronies be punished to the full extent of the law for the crimes they committed.

[seemunkee]

2. Anthrax?

and a city from drowning? Granted he couldn't stop a hurricane but he could have saved lives

[Bandit]

3. Does safety only involve terror or does it involve finances as well.

America's financial "safety net" was completely dismantled by the Bush* Cabal. Safety involves more than just not being bombed with a nuclear bomb. That didn't happen under Clinton either but our financial safety was enhanced under Clinton.

[liberalla]

4. I'm SO sick of the "he kept us safe" --- but only AFTER 9/11

So, following this rationalization, I guess every prez gets one freakin huge failure 'freebie'... before we actually start keeping track and counting each administration's failures?

And, recently Olbermann went through and debunked all the lies of the thwarted attempts to attack us on US soil since 9/11.

I love Richard Clarke and think he would have been incredible as CIA chief.

[lpbk2713]

5. "Tairists" didn't need to go to any trouble. They saw we were self-destructing.

BushCo was doing their job so well for them that they just sat back and enjoyed the show.