Fletis Humplebacker wrote:
"mp"
Really. On that day, how could anyone have performed worse than
Bush? Do
you
think Gore or any other sane person would have stood around and
listened
to
goat stories while New York burned?

And he should have rushed out and peed on the towers to put the
flames out
right? Kerry said they sat around stunned for 45 minutes. I think
it was a
normal reaction, not much could have been done after the fact but
your
criticism is typical of the left. Keep it up, I like the results.


It's pretty hard to argue against someone who thinks a normal
reaction is
sitting around listening to goat stories with a dumb
deer-in-the-headlights
stare while the country you're responsible for (specifically the
commerce
center of the world) is being attacked and destroyed.


At least you aren't one of those who thinks he knew before the
attacks happened or was in on it. I'm still not sure what you think
he should have done at the moment.

Clearly he did nothing for the rest of the day except make a
brief speech. It was one thing to leave Cheney in charge while
en route to AF1 from the school. But Cheney stayed in charge
of the nation's defense that day even after Bush was aboard AF1.

AF1 is designed specifically to permit the US president to
manage the national defense while airborne. That Bush left the
defense of the nation to Cheney is a clear indication that
Bush knew he was the less competent of the two.

I'm glad that when the chips were down he stepped aside and
let the more competent person take over. I'm not happy to
have a President who is not competent to be Comander-in-Chief.

--

FF