I don't really want either one of them, personally, but nobody asked me.
But then, as I've said before, anybody willing to do what it takes to become President is IMO unqualified to hold the position.
Some day we'll have to discuss whether, if Clinton had accepted bin Laden being turned over to us when he was offered to us (was it the Somalians? I forget), the World Trade Towers would still be standing. And if they were, Bush would never have mustered the support to invade Iraq, or pass the Patriot Act. So you could, if you were so minded, say that Clinton's error led to both those results. (Not to mention his totally vapid responses to the bombings in Narobi and of the Cole.)
On the environment, he was far ahead of Bush. No question there. And on some (not all) social issues. But on national security and interests, well, 'nuff said for now.
And it's nice to have some adults in the White House for a change. That I hope we can agree on. |
