Yes, it’s true: since I moved from Bethlehem to Athens there hasn’t been another attack on US soil. Doesn’t make much sense, does it?
What Bush said in his farewell address made just about as much sense to me: “There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions [ie secret prisons, Gitmo, waterboarding, etc]. But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil.”
Okay. Well, we went almost 60 years without an attack on our soil prior to 9/11. So, every president from Truman to Clinton can boast that there were no terrorist attacks on US soil during their presidency. What did they do that was so effective in thwarting terrorists? Anything? Or did they really just dodge a bullet?
Bush will be forever known as the man in charge when we had our first attack since Pearl Harbor. His fault? Some may argue, yes, but ultimately I think he was just unlucky enough to be the Prez when the terrorists finally organized themselves enough to coordinate an effective assault. Now, for him to claim that the policies he implemented directly prevented another attack seems like a desperate leap in logic. I’m not saying that attacks weren’t stopped, I’m sure they were. However, if terrorists had the resources to stage another attack on the level with 9/11, I am sure that they would have already.
So, what will happen if there is a terrorist attack on Obama’s watch? Will the blame immediately fall on him? Or, will we concede that it is impossible to protect ourselves from every eventuality? I hope we don’t have to find out.
I voted on Friday (in my halloween costume – the poll worker did a double take when she saw that my Foree Electric name tag said Shaun, but my drivers license said Amy). I waited for about two hours to perform my constitutional right, and it was worth it. Because for one, I won’t have to wait in line five hours today and two, I now have the right to bitch about the government (if you didn’t vote – you can’t bitch, sorry).
Here is a great article from The New Yorker about how voting has changed in our country. If you knew that your life could be threatened if you went to the polls, would you still vote?
It was refreshing to have the option of not voting for an old white guy this year. Will voting for a black man give me some street cred? Will having a black President finally make the world see us as something other than a bunch of blow-hard cowboys? I hope so.
What about if we had a woman Vice Prez, you might ask? Well, I don’t think Sarah Palin is actually a woman, so she doesn’t count. I think the GOP shaved a bear and put it in a suit and heels. When she talks all I hear is growling and gnashing of teeth and I want to curl up in the fetal position and play dead.
via toothpastefordinner’s sister site superpoop
The latest issue of Nature magazine features an article about the pending election (why? what does Nature have to do with politics??) and our two candidates are on the cover – Obama on the left and McCain on the right, of course.
Wholly unremarkable, until you compare the cover photograph to the advertisement they chose to run on the back cover:
Is it me or do the dogs look more sincere? They do look like they are listening, rather than just waiting to speak, which is something our politicians could take a lesson in.
You can read about the uncanny ad placement here. The magazine apologizes for the match-up, but I don’t think they have any reason to be sorry. The ad isn’t derogatory in any way. It’s just a fun fact about dogs. Everyone loves dogs. Unless you are a commie, then you have bigger issues regarding this election other than comparing our candidates to canines.