Cindy Richards
Posted on 09/13/2006 4:27:26 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
It was early summer when I made my plane reservations to head to Sun Valley, Idaho, for a weekend journalism conference. I booked the return trip for Sept. 11. Without its more emotionally laden name, 9/11, it felt as though I was simply flying on any old Monday.
It wasn't until a week ago that I realized I would be heading home on the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks. It was, to say the least, unnerving.
Even as I took off my shoes and jacket to make my way through the security checkpoints, I was reminded how little has changed in America in these last five years.
Sure, some things are different, flying, for instance. Chugging the last of the bottled water, tossing the toothpaste and waiting to see whether you'll be unlucky enough to be subject to the wand scanner at security certainly drives home the point that we aren't who we used to be.
Outside of airports, too, we have changed. We're more suspicious, less trusting, a little jumpier.
Even a clap of thunder, especially when it sounds on 9/11, can leave us shaken. Or so it was for my family. When I called home on Monday to let them know my plane would be delayed, they told me about a clap of thunder that hit that morning. It was, they all agreed, the loudest boom they had ever heard.
Their first thought: a bomb.
Of course, it was just a message from Mother Nature, not one delivered by some Islamic militant.
Likewise, my flights were delayed by Mother Nature, not a suicide bomber. Not that I expected a flight from Sun Valley, Idaho, to Salt Lake City, Utah, or one from Salt Lake to Chicago would be likely terrorist targets but, well, you just never know these days, do you?
And that, it seems, is the biggest change of the last five years. We no longer can go through life feeling smug that we are immune from the woes of the world.
But we have not changed in the way many had predicted while searchers still combed through the rubble. We have not united against a common enemy.
In his prime-time address to the nation -- delivered five years to the minute after he addressed the nation in the wake of the attacks -- President Bush put the terrorist attacks in the context of our war in Iraq. Noting that he is often asked why we're in Iraq when Osama bin Laden is somewhere else, he said that Saddam Hussein was still a threat to America and needed to be rousted.
Seems a bit like punishing one kid for the sins of another with the excuse that "If he didn't do this, he probably did something else."
But then, this is politics. We have a midterm election looming and some Republicans are worried about how a few Democratic victories could change the political landscape.
So it wasn't surprising that Democratic leaders were quick to criticize the president for "politicizing" a national tragedy. As though they haven't done it themselves and won't continue to do so into the foreseeable future.
In his speech, the president called for national unity, the thing he is least likely to get anytime soon. Sure, we all shared in a moment of silence, or wiped a tear as we remembered that horrible day, but that's as far as it goes. Once the day ended without incident, we all returned to our political corners.
At the risk of sounding partisan, the blame for that has to fall on the president. On Sept. 12, 2001, he had that national unity, handed to him by some Muslim extremists who thought they could take on the world's superpower. But he let it slip away when he chose to fight the wrong target.
If we were in a fight against our real enemy, Osama bin Laden, we would be united.
mailto:cindyrichards153@hotmail.com
Same war. Different front.
"It was early summer when I made my plane reservations to head to Sun Valley, Idaho"
Did she stop by to chat with Kerry and Tereza about this?
I always ask folks who claim they support the war in Afghanistan but not Iraq why my grandfather was in North Africa a year after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
Somehow, I doubt it.
How long did it take the Liberals/Democrats to start screaming "quagmire" after actions started in Afghanistan?
A week or less as I recall.
The RATS still haven'tgtold us how they would capture Osama with all those troops that wouldn't go to Iraq.
Are they telling us they would invade Pakistan? Would they invade Iran? WOuld they invade Syria? I think if they are going to bitch and whine about it, at the least they should tell America who they were going to invade to capture Osama.
I seriously doubt the RATS would invade Pakistan, since they told Pakistan what they were doing back in 1998 and in turn the RATS told Osama.
They side with the enemy against American soldiers and call Bush the divider.
Cindy Richards
"But like all liberal drive-by media pro-lesbian anti-gun, anti-capitalism, anti-big oil, food, pharmceuticals (except for that stuff I spread on my raging YEAST infection!), anti-white, anti-republican, anti-conservative, anti-pro-life, anti-anti, I just decided to fake it because the money was good and I could editorialize my raging visceral hate for America!"
Bush is a DIVIDER! He insists on defending the country while the Democrats insist on surrender. That is creating DIVISION! Bush should be a unifier and boldly invite the Saracens to set up their sub-caliphate office in DC.
Fed hard candy with a sling shot????????????????? That's one of those fake nose-eyeglasses halloween deals right???
Even faithful struggle with religion (Cindy Richards Shallow End of the Pool Alert)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1015151/posts
Bush IS a divider.
He divides right from wrong, good from evil.
Unfortunately, the lib-Dem-weenies are increasingly on the side of wrong and evil.
It is always interesting to see the face of the writer.
I guess she would have said the same thing about Lincoln.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.