Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Typhoid
There also weren't large-scale terror attacks prior to 9/11
|
Well, actually the World Trade Center was bombed back in the early 90's, it just failed to bring the building down. Of course we just ignored it prior to Bush being in the white house. Bush is the first president to take terrorism seriously, and with good reason.
Quote:
|
Your point for number 3 reminds of of that "This rock keeps tigers away" 'theory', despite the fact the rock may be situated in Ohio.
|
I never said Bush was sitting on the border himself keeping attacks at bay, I said his POLICIES have kept us safe. Policies, including open intelligence with key allies such as Great Britain. You know, kind of like the coordinated stoppage of the latest attack that was planned for last week.
Its alwaus oing to be difficult to prove that any governments policies stop terror attacks for the reason that its hard to prove something on the LACK of something. Me? We've been attack free since 9/11 , with the two PROVEN protective stoppages I mentioned before that you ignored, and thats proof enough for me.
Quote:
|
Thats odd, I just searched the internet, and found an article, released today saying the American Economy is cooling.
|
1) Cooling is one thing, and is relative to how well it was going before, saying its bad is another.
2) Please provide a source for that unemployment number, as it is pretty provacative and goes against every number I've seen. Also, I would need to see the data of the TIME that these criteria were changed, if its accurate to begn with, to see if Bush has been working with skewed numbers or if every multiple presidencies have.
Honestly? This number seems outrageous to me and I would have to see it to believe it. It would equal the unemployment rate of France and you would think we would share the same social strife that they are experiencing right now if that was the case.