Why we can lose: Because of "dumb-assedness" (squared) amongst other things

Read this. Then this (sound Canadian?).

This is why we can lose (full text subscribers only):

...The real disaster of 9/11 is that George W. Bush was president.

I mean, of course, the collective Bush -- the good ol' boy and his string-pulling cohorts with their poisonous instincts and unerring flair for mismanagement. I mean the man whose response to the crisis, after he stopped flying around the country looking for a place to hide, was that he was gonna hunt the bad guys down and smoke 'em out.

Which, in all its simplistic dumb-assedness, pretty much sums up five years' worth of the official U.S. response to the complex disaster that was 9/11.

No one else in recent memory -- not Al Gore (who should have been in the White House that day), not Bill Clinton, probably not even George pere -- would have botched the job quite like Junior, who has made both the U.S. and the rest of the world a far darker and more dangerous place than it was five years ago.

The real disaster of 9/11 is that George W. Bush was president.

I mean, of course, the collective Bush -- the good ol' boy and his string-pulling cohorts with their poisonous instincts and unerring flair for mismanagement. I mean the man whose response to the crisis, after he stopped flying around the country looking for a place to hide, was that he was gonna hunt the bad guys down and smoke 'em out.

Which, in all its simplistic dumb-assedness, pretty much sums up five years' worth of the official U.S. response to the complex disaster that was 9/11.

No one else in recent memory -- not Al Gore (who should have been in the White House that day), not Bill Clinton, probably not even George pere -- would have botched the job quite like Junior, who has made both the U.S. and the rest of the world a far darker and more dangerous place than it was five years ago...

Note the reference to Bill Clinton. Now read this:

A majority of Canadians believe U.S. foreign policy was one of the root causes that led to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks...

Who was president of the US for eight years during which al Qaeda grew and became more violent as a result of the the horrors of US foreign policy--surely some "botching" there? Who was president when the plotting for 9/11 developed? Thus whose foreign policy was responsible for 9/11 (Mr Bush had been president for less than eight months/months when the attacks took place) if not Mr Clinton?

What do you think the poll results would be in Canada if people were asked: "Do you think President Clinton was responsible for the events [to be politically correct] of 9/11?"

How feeble are both Canadians' memory of recent history and their logic.

Mark C.

Update: Another poll demonstrates even further that Canadians are historically-challenged:

Just over half of Canadians blame American foreign policy for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, showing a hardening of opinions since the one-year anniversary of the disaster when people in this country were less inclined to attribute the bombings to U.S. meddling in certain parts of the world.

A poll conducted for Canwest News Service indicates 53 per cent of Canadians believe the attacks were "a very specific violent reaction to foreign policies of the U.S. government."..

The results show that Canadians are more firm in their blame since the first anniversary of Sept. 11, in 2002, when only 15 per cent said U.S. foreign policy was responsible for the attacks and another 69 per cent suspected it was somewhat responsible...

Canadians really must think Bill Clinton has a lot to answer for--except they don't because they just don't remember who was president when the US was doing the "meddling", such as saving the Muslim Bosnians and Kosovars. It is simply amazing how Canadians have somehow turned Mr Clinton into President Bush.

Posted by markc at September 10, 2006 10:08 PM