One of the reports that Sandy Berger stuffed in his socks and walked out with was a report detailing the operation to get Osama Bin Laden in 1998. Guess who nixed that operation. It wasn't George Bush.
And I guess I forget, what were Al's policies to prevent 19 men from flying planes into our buildings? Were they the same ideas that prevented someone from parking a truck bomb in front of an Oaklahoma federal building for the largest act of domestic terrorism in US history? Were they the same ideas that prevented the first attack on the WTC? Were they the same ideas the prevented Ruby Ridge and Waco? Were they the same ideas the saved our boys on the USS Cole, or were they the same ideas that saved our embassies and thousands of natives in Africa? What exact magic wand was going to wave that was going to change all of that???
This is a bold faced lie. I have demonstrated at least a few times that the recession was caused by the Clinton/Gore administration, but I guess I can tell it again. The Bureau of Labor Statistics put the start of the recession at March of 2001. Bush took office about 6 weeks before then. With a basic understanding of the velocity of money, it is economically impossible that any action the Bush admin could have taken would have enough effect on the US economy to cause a recession. This is a fact. The conservate estimate for economic activity to have a measurible effect in the US economy, due to its enormous size is 6 months. Estimates range as high as a year plus for economic activity to have measurible economic effect on the US economy.
Also after 9-11 how exactly would Al Gore have cured our economy. Since he wouldn't have cut taxes, because he is opposed to tax cuts for the rich. And he wouldn't have increased spending appreciablly because he opposed to deficits, what is left? The key to the recovery after 9-11 is two fold. One maintaining confidence, and two keeping money flowing through the economy. By neither increasing spending or cutting taxes he would have failed at both of these vital fucntions.
And to the second part of that, with no confidence and no one spending money, how exactly are companies to continue operating? The economic effects of Gore's inactions, or even assuming small actions, would have been catastrophic. The multipier effect of consumers wallets closing up would have been dire. Come to think of it you probably are right, we wouldn't have had a recession. According to your posts about Gore would have had a full blown depression.
Say what you want about Bush and his social policy. Hell I'll probably agree with most of it. But don't make contradictary assumptions about economy and terrorism. There is plenty of evidence out there on a lot of stuff.
I appreciate your passion, but come on. Some of those statements are so chockful of idealism, they need a nutritional label to tell you how much sugarcoating is in them!
