Lando
Good article ! Thanks for posting and the ping ...Like George McClellan in 1864, the Democratic Party today officially maintains that it has a plan for fighting terror while, with a wink and nod; they let everyone know that they mean to do no such thing. The Democrats of one hundred and forty years ago called for peace convention to restore the Union when virtually everyone knew that it would result in exactly the opposite: permanent disunion. Similarly, modern Democrats occasionally try to talk though about terrorism, but lack any plans for actually doing anything about it (aside, of course from “consulting with our allies”).
Democrats seem to be seized by the strange notion that Clinton’s policies for “fighting terrorism” were just fine and will work well if re-implemented. This seems to be based largely on the specious theory that, “well, no 9-11 happened when Clinton was President, so everything must have been ok.” A vote for the Democrats means more terrorist attacks on America, more orphans, more bereaved families. Maybe millions of them. If a Democrat is elected President, the odds of a major attack on America go up seriously for two reasons: the pressure on al-Qaeda will decrease and the leadership of that group will, given that the War on Terrorism resulted in the defeat of Bush, come to the conclusion that another major terror attack will push the United States to let up altogether.
