Commentary from my point of view
I have a new nickname for President Bush - Superman!The man must be a genius the way he planned the 9/11 attacks. Many of us had thought that Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda were to blame for 9/11 but now I understand it's Bush. Thanks for clarifying that.It's amazing how clever he was when he devised a way to subliminally plant hatred into the brain of Cho Seung Hui. It's also genius that he ensured his success by declaring Virginia Tech to be a gun-free zone to clear his path from those pesky, gun-toting Virginia rednecks.His most amazing feat - really earning him the title of Superman is he single-handedly cooked the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, thus enabling a hurricane to waltz in and wreak havoc. He also must have pulled the ripcord to timely release the waters in the levies. Not only that, he coached many of the citizens to ignore the warnings that were given up to 3 days before the hurricane arrived. What an amazing guy!
here is facts about all three:9/11: Bush was told an attack was coming in AUGUST and no warnings were issued.Bush and the Republican Congress and Senate allowed the Brady Bill to expire which required a waiting period to purchase guns hence why the shooter (I won't glorify his name here) was easily allowed to buy the gun.And Katrina, where to begin.. Katrina was declared a FEDERAL DISASTER (there is a timeline in my archives) before she hit and Bush did nothing to help evacuations and he did nothing immediately to help after the storm hit. That's why it's him.Doesn't the buck stop there?
If George Bush had reacted strongly to the threats that preceded 9/11 - enough to prevent it from happening, he would have been berated to death for being a paranoid fear-mongerer. I'm not saying he shouldn't have taken the threats more seriously, but it's real easy to have 20/20 hindsight. You'll never convince me that Clinton, Gore, Kerry or any other conceivable president would have acted differently. I still blame Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda. We shouldn't lose our focus.The Brady Bill is utterly useless. It does nothing. The perpetrator would simply have bought his gun sooner or waited longer before he went on his rampage. Or maybe he would have obtained the gun illegally (imagine a criminal doing that?) He was obviously committed to do his deed, no gun control law would have stopped him. However, no citizen could stop him either since guns were outlawed at the university - giving him free reign to do his thing. On Jan 16, 2002, a similar thing happened at Appalachian law school:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting. The difference is that two students had guns in their cars and subdued the gunman before he killed many more than the two he did.The Katrina thing, well we're just going to have to disagree. The President of the United States is not responsible for aiding victims of national disasters and that's the way it should be. It is unbelievable to me that people don't put the bulk of the blame on the city and state governments. As far as "the buck stops here", let me remind you we live in the United States of America where there is no king, tzar, dictator, or any single individual who has control of our nation. The President is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, not the entire nation.
That would not have been done by me just so you know. I would have given him the credit ON THAT he would have deserved. I keep bringing up who was in charge on 9/11 because Republicans seem to forget that when they say when Democrats take the President in 2008 there will be worse attacks. They always seem to forget THEY were in charge then.
Guliani said that YET AGAIN yesterday.
And the Brady Bill was not useless and the waiting period was helpful.
"And the Brady Bill was not useless and the waiting period was helpful."For whom?
Post a Comment