Take One Down for Me
Reader Daryl McCullah writes:
That's what Gore was doing. Clinton *did* take action against Al Qaeda,
and Bush *didn't* prior to 9/11. It took 3000 deaths before Bush got
serious about Al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda was a high priority for Clinton at the end of 2000. Of course
it wasn't as high a priority as it became for Bush after 9/11. But it
was a higher priority for Clinton than it was for Bush, prior to 9/11.
It hardly makes sense to compare Clinton's responses to Bush's responses
after 9/11. A fairer comparison would be Clinton's response to terrorism
to Reagan's response to the 1986 Berlin disco bombings. In both cases,
we bombed the people we thought were responsible. In neither case did we
succeed in killing him.
Perhaps in light of 9/11, American Presidents will in the future always
respond to any act of terrorism by invading a country and overthrowing
Have at it, kids.
Article printed from VodkaPundit: http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit
URL to article: http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2002/9/27/take-one-down-for-me