Victoria Daft

In case they're deleted again:

TNR, so - I want to get this straight - Bill Clinton messed up (in your opinion), but when given the chance to change direction and history, Bush and his rubber-stamp Republicans of the early part of this decade did nothing.

And though the Republican controlled everything did nothing FOR YEARS, it's still Clinton's fault?

*********

Victoria and Lew - I'm not sure what you're arguing with me here. I only said (or was trying to say, at least) that the "economic terrorism", or whatever we want to call it, isn't "fearmongering" in as much as it's *actually happening*.

As I said above, I heard many post-9/11 reports and analysis that indicated that Bin Laden's goal wasn't to take down the towers so much as that it was to create financial havoc as a result. The towers were the means to an end, not the ultimate goal.

As I said, this isn't "fearmongering" - it actually happened.

"Fearmongering" is, to me, changing Homeland Security's color-coded threat levels (remember that?) close to election time (like in 2004). It's getting Fox News to pump up stories about dirty bombs. It's saying that electing Democrats will directly result more terrorism. Stuff like that.

***********
Three other quick thoughts:

1. The stimulus checks sure worked like a charm for the economy, didn't they?

2. We should all let out a gigantic sigh of relief that our congress was not duped into supporting President Bush's idea to privatize Social Security. Given the way the stock market has tumbled in recent days and weeks, can you imagine if our grandparents found their Social Security savings pounded into oblivion at the time they need that money most?

3. In another thread, someone posed a question about whether or not Barack Obama will be blamed for a recession once Bush is out of office, the way Bush was blamed for the economic turmoils he experienced when Bill Clinton left office.

This assumes that Obama will be elected President (which I believe will happen, but that's neither here nor there in terms of this argument).

Say McCain wins, and the recession continues. Do you blame McCain, or do you blame Bush? Because you can't blame Clinton again, not this time.

(Though I know the answer - you'll blame the Democrats anyway.)