a [short] review

Regardless of for whom you voted in 2000, 2004, or 2008, and regardless of whether or not you approve of the out-going president, or his replacement, certainly one thing can be agreed-upon.

Less than 8 months after President George W Bush took office, some group of people hostile to the United States flew aircraft into densely-populated buildings in one of the largest cities in the world.

Had our president NOT reacted, Americans worldwide would have been on the road to kill or impeach him. And hostiles worldwide would’ve looked at us as a bunch of pansies who turn and run when the going gets tough.

In 2000 I voted for Mr Bush. I wanted someone else to get the Republican nomination, but he didn’t. I personally could not have voted in good conscience for Mr Gore.

But regardless of who could’ve won, I would not have wished such a monumental situation on any elected official – even those I vehemently disagree with.

Had Mr Gore, or anyone else, won the presidency in 2000, all things being equal, what would their reaction to 9/11 have been? Could anyone else have made a “better” decision with what little data we had? I don’t think so. I think many worse decisions could’ve been made, and I’m convinced that equally valid, but different routes could’ve been employed in prosecuting those who attacked us.

I hope and pray that the man about to take over from Mr Bush doesn’t have another issue to deal with the way Mr Bush did. I’d like to see Mr Obama recant his liberal leanings and at least move to the center, if not be converted to a conservative. But mostly I hope that nothing happens for the term of his presidency – and that he goes home when he’s done the way Mr Coolidge did 80 years ago.