• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

The Left Remembers 9/11

Earlier, I collected a series of 9/11 anniversary reflections from the press and the blogosphere. Many of them were moving but none were particularly novel. By that, I mean that everyone pretty much agreed that the day was horrible, changed a lot of things about the world, and reflected on people who were murdered that day.

There’s a different view out there, though, and it’s not just held by Muslim fanatics and our enemies across the globe but by some prominent lefties with large soapboxes.

Andy Rooney explains why the tragedy was really our fault:

The disaster on September 11th wasn’t like any of those. It was manmade. Death by design. Some people who hated Americans set out to kill a lot of us and they succeeded

Americans are puzzled over why so many people in the world hate us. We seem so nice to ourselves. They do hate us though. We know that and we’re trying to protect ourselves with more weapons.

We have to do it I suppose but it might be better if we figured out how to behave as a nation in a way that wouldn’t make so many people in the world want to kill us.

Duncan “Atrios” Black, meanwhile, does his best Kos imitation:

But, anyway, just a big hearty fuck you to the White House and the news media who have decided this day is largely a personal narrative about George Bush, a man who was almost entirely absent on that day then had a big giggle before falling asleep early. It isn’t about him, and unless you were in New York or Washington or were close to people who were directly affected, it’s probably not about you either.

Kos himself echoes much the same sentiment, although in the context of personal reflection:

It’s not about me, and it’s certainly not about Bush, who after his famous Pet Goat moment cowardly fled and hid out in Nebraska in fear — the same kind of abject fear they’d spend the next five years selling to the American people.

For me, the worst part of the day was telling my mother, who had called me singing “happy birthday”, to please stop and go turn on the television. It was a jarring moment. She thought I was telling her to stop because I felt too old at 30. In reality, I felt like throwing up because the world was changing overnight, and not for the best.

Aside from the fact that the media views most commemorations of solemn events through the lens of the presidency, given that that officeholder is the de facto Head of State, I know of no one who thinks today is about President Bush. Unless it’s lefties who want to use the occasion to remind is that Osama bin Laden is still on the loose.

This isn’t just the radical fringe of the Angry Left, either.

Ezra Klein: “Five years ago, we were attacked. But the real damage happened when we responded.”

Michael Tomasky calls “OBSCENE” media coverage of Bush commemorations that don’t discuss the “partisan rancor” that “Bush & Co. have enforced on the country since about 9-14.”

Wayne Barrett and Dan Collins have a piece in The American Prospect, debuting today, arguing that Rudy Giuliani was not a hero who united a great city and the country in a time of crisis but rather a blundering nincompoop whose poor administrative skills made much of the tragedy possible.

A quick perusal of the Huffington Post reveals more of the same (although there is at least one more traditional reflection from Seth Swirsky):

Bill Press: “There were good lessons learned, and bad ones. Unfortunately, George Bush learned only the bad ones.”

Robert Sheer: “In light of that sorry record of the propagandistic exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy for partisan political purpose, is it any wonder that large numbers of Americans have doubts about all of it and that a considerable industry of documentaries and investigative reports has sprung up with alternative theories ranging from the plausible to the absurd?”

Kevin Drum links the Tomasky piece above approvingly, noting that a ceremony where Bush, Guiliani, and New York governor George Pataki lay a wreath in commemoration of the attacks on the World Trde Center without inviting any Democrats is “enough to make you ill.”

Josh Marshall has yet to comment on the anniversary, aside from a comment-free link to the Guiliani hit piece.

[Update: Less surprisingly, ACLU to the gets into the fray: "In the five years since the terrorist attacks of September 11, Americans have successfully kept the light of freedom shining even as the Bush administration has consistently violated the spirit and letter of our laws, the American Civil Liberties Union said today." via John Stevenson]

I don’t mean to suggest that most people on the Left don’t mourn the tragedy of 9/11, hate America, or any such nonsense. And I’m sure that if I trolled around long enough, I’d find some bloggers on the Right using the day as an occasion to bash Democrats and explain that why Voting for Any Democrat is Tantamount to Surrender to Osama Bin LadenTM. Still, the stridency of these posts, even from bloggers and publications on the moderate side of the lefty blogosphere is surprising.

UPDATE: Kevin Drum responds, arguing that, unlike FDR, Bush failed to put aside his partisanship to bring the country together and win the war. Leaving aside whether FDR truly did that and the differences between the age of gotcha journalism and instant communications vice one where the press willingly cooperated with a president in his attempts to deceive the public about the fact he was confined to a wheelchair, there’s not much doubt that Rove and company saw the war as part and parcel of the re-election strategy.

Still, understanding that the Left and Right view things (the Clinton impeachment, for example) through different lenses, much of the criticism is odd:

He continued pushing divisive domestic issues like tax cuts and culture war amendments. (“Dr. Tax Cuts has been replaced by Dr. Win the War” would have been more appropriate.) He showed little interest in funding anti-proliferation efforts or working with serious Democratic proposals to improve domestic security at ports and chemical plants. The national security rhetoric from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the administration was relentlessly inflammatory and divisive.

Just as FDR didn’t roll back the New Deal when his war got going, Bush didn’t suddenly stop believing in tax cuts, the non-utility of the UN, and so forth. Further, it’s not as if Democrats stopped trying to stonewall the majority’s policy initiatives in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation.

Related Posts:

  • None Found

About James Joyner
James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway, an associate professor of security studies at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College, and a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. He has a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter.

Comments

  1. On the blog side, I don’t see much. Nothing at Captain’s Quarters, nothing at Balloon Juice (although John Cole dislikes Bush immensely), nothing at Redstate, nothing at Outside the Beltway (although James Joyner criticizes what he stereotypically calls “the radical fringe of the Angry Left” for its remembrance of 9/11 — who says 9/11 hasn’t been partisanized?). Sister Toldjah, whom I get along with quite well even in disagreement, is an exception: “Wow. That’s one

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Gizmodo [IMG] +9 from yesterday http://gizmodo.com – 18 mentions 100. MySpace Codes [IMG] -24 from yesterday http://www.pulseware.com.au/site_pi.asp?p=wpa-21472 – 18 mentions 101. The Left Remembers 9/11 » Outside The Beltway | OTB [IMG] +18 from yesterday http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/09/the_left_remembers_911_/ – 18 mentions 102. Democracy – Internet TV Platform – Free and Open Source [IMG] +18 from yesterday

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. worse, espousing inflammatory conspiracy theories, in my opinion as much a part of the problem as any extremist Imam’s hate-speech, as the stalwarts of FrontPage Mag managed today. Today should be about respect and remembering, not recriminations from either side of the partisan divide. Tomorrow is soon enough for the latter, dontcha think? Instead, I will point you towards the BBC’s excellent “Five Years On” collection of reports and articles. Make sure you check out their “the aftermath in statistics”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. It’s a day of reflection all over the blogosphere (but not here, just links to others’ thoughts). A good round up of links can be found at Tammy Bruce’s blog. A good round up of left side of the blogosphere reflections can be found at Outside the Beltway, posted by James Joyner (the sinistral are unfortunately predictable in their tone and take on events). My personal round up of reflections is as follows

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. [IMG]18. The Left Remembers 9/11 » Outside The Beltway | OTB (citations)[IMG] [IMG][IMG]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. in bringing together Americans to stand as a united front against the threat of terrorism — instead, they choose to capitalize on the tragedy by making more blatantly political assaults. Sad and Just Wrong! Dr. Sanity has more of the hatemongering! Outside the Beltway has more of the reaction from the Left. And… despite cat-calls from the audience, Congressman Jim Moran did some campaigning today. Disturbingly Yellow notices that The Guardian has moved on to other stories.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Old War Dogs says:

    Allen, 54, said he did not see racial overtones in the Confederate flag. He said he was a rebellious youth and viewed the banner as a “symbol against authority.” … Blame America Second James Joyner Jim Henley believes a recent post of mine was too dismissive of Andy Rooney’s foreign policy analysis. Joyner: “Andy Rooney explains why the [9/11] tragedy was really our fault:” Americans are puzzled over why so many people in the world hate us. We seem so nice to ourselves.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. in national elections. … Compare and contrast: FDR was surely one of the most partisan presidents of the 20th century, but after Pearl Harbor he announced that “Dr. New Deal has been replaced by Dr. Win the War.” And he made good on that. Joyner shot back: “Just as FDR didn’t roll back the New Deal when his war got going, Bush didn’t suddenly stop believing in tax cuts, the non-utility of the UN, and so forth. Further, it’s not as if Democrats stopped trying to stonewall the majority’s policy

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. February 13, 1999 Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers. Other 9/11 posts. The Right Nation Outside the Beltway chronicles  BDS Tags: 2008, BlogDesk, Cheney, Clinton, Hamas, Hesballah, Hezballah, Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Israel, Khomeni, McCain, Muslim, Pajama Media, President Bush, Saddam, Syria, terrorism, terrorist,

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. “This” being a comment left at James Joyner’s post “The Left Remembers 9/11″ at Outside The Beltway. Maybe I’m getting dense in my old age, but I’m really not sure. What do you think?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. I think you would also have to consider the number and prominence of most of the lefty bloggers you mention here vs the odd right side bloggers that might be found.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Joannes Jacobsen says:

    You don’t have to “troll around long”. Look no further than nationalreview.com, for example.
    To most of us the “stridency” of the posts on the right are not surprising at all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Bandit says:

    ‘Still, the stridency of these posts, even from bloggers and publications on the moderate side of the lefty blogosphere is surprising. ‘

    Surprising to people who live in a dreamworld. It’s a great opportunity to have the left to convey their sympathies without the pretense of giving a shit about America.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Kos Changes Tasteless 9/11 Open Thread …

    This morning: Now: I guess Kos decided that taking a schmucky swipe at ABC and President Bush on 9/11 was a little too much after all. Update: James Joyner rounds-up lefty rememberances on today’s anniversary…….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. LeftCreed says:

    We believe that Bush, Cheney, and Republicans bear sole responsibility for 9/11;

    We believe that the United States and its policies are responsible for making terrorists attack this country;

    We believe that if we get rid of George Bush and the Republicans, we will once again be safe;

    We believe that the people of America who supported those policies over the years (during Republican administrations) are little Eichmanns, and deserved to die on 9/11 ;

    We are ready to believe (if the polls support us) that Bush and Cheney actually planned the events of 9/11 as a prelude to taking over this country, destroying our civil liberties; and instituting a fascist state.

    We believe that Israel probably had a part in the events of 9/11, working with Bush and Cheney in some sort of neocon plot;

    We believe that the only people who are innocent of 9/11 are the actual terrorists who plotted and executed it;

    We believe that Bill Clinton and his administration had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and that, if Al Gore had won the 2000 election then 9/11 would never have happened;

    We believe that anyone who disagrees with the above statement is trying to distort history and their views should be prohibited. Only we –and Michael Moore– know the truth and should be heard.

    We believe that Bill Clinton and Sandy Berger have never lied;

    We believe that the most serious outcome of 9/11 is the Islamophobia and the unconscionable backlash that has victimized Muslims in the U.S.;

    We believe that the greatest threat to freedom in this country occurs when images of 9/11 are used to further the warmongering plans of the Bush Administration;

    We believe that all the rhetoric used by the Bush Adminsitration is pure evil, designed to manipulate people to hate; but that the rhetoric used by Iran and the fatwas of Al Qaeda are “only words” and should not be taken at all seriously;
    We believe that the people who flew airplanes into buildings on 9/11 are reasonable people who you can trust, and with whom you can discuss reality;

    We believe that the Bush Administration is irrational, unreasonble and certainly cannot be trusted; and that they are completely out of touch with reality.

    We believe that Iraq had nothing–nothing–to do with 9/11 because Saddam Hussein and his lieutenants have clearly said so, and we believe and trust them.

    We believe that the deaths of almost 3000 Americans on 9/11 is not a big deal; certainly doesn’t deserve the disproportionate response that the Bush Adminsitration has taken in the last 5 years; and that the threat to the U.S. has been grossly overblown and manipulated so that the Bush Adminsitration and Republicans can accumulate political power.

    We beleive that our motives in saying all this are pure, holy, and extremely patriotic; because we have no desire to acquire political power for ourselves and that it is our selfless duty to make sure the American people to accept our creed.

    We believe this country has suffered horribly under George W. Bush,
    whose policies have caused us to
    descend into hell.

    But in November, 2006 , we will rise from the dead.
    and ascend into congressional heaven
    and shall sit once again at the right hand of power
    from whence we shall judge the current administration.

    We believe in the perfection of the U.N.,
    the communion of multiculturalism,
    the victimhood of the oppressed,
    the resurrection of a dead ideology,
    and denial everlasting.

    Amen.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. Mr. Snitch! says:

    It’s good that you pointed out these posts from the left. Lots of talk from the left about Bush’s spinelessness. But for real, world-class cowardice, you want to grab New York’s Village Voice published right after the attack. No words of sympathy for the terrorists, nor the criticism of Giuliani and Bush that you’d find many months afterward. The Voice, and most of the left, only found the courage of their convictions when it was safe to do so. Until then, they hid behind political leaders and ‘hero firefighters’ like everyone else, and their fear, frankly, was palpable. You could smell it coming off the page.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. Ben says:

    Andy Rooney’s quote and you assumption that it is saying it is our fault is troubling. Will you consider anything other then America being spotless? Such a stance is that of one that is uneducated. We supported and still support violent dictators. One of them being Saddam when he was useful to us. We do create people that hate us by supporting Israel so strongly.

    Do I think any of that is wrong? I don’t know, it depends on each situation. My point is that people have reason to hate us and if we want to win this war in the Muslim world we must do one of two things. Kill everyone or win their minds over. That is what Rooney is suggesting.

    No, I’m not a liberal, no I’m not a dem. I’m just common sense that seems to have lost the Republican Party who favors a fantasy world over reality.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Scotch says:

    Kos’ birthday is 9/11? Wow, just like Butters!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. Karl says:

    Joannes Jacobsen asks that we look no further than nationalreview.com for examples of bloggers on the Right using the day as an occasion to bash Democrats and explain that why Voting for Any Democrat is Tantamount to Surrender to Osama Bin Ladensmall>TM.

    Oddly enough, Jacobsen didn’t link to any pieces that were exaples of this, so I went over myself looking for them.

    The site has posted a bunch of articles under the heading, “9/11: FIVE YEARS LATER.” About the only piece that looked promising was Patriotism Faded, by John O’Sullivan.

    How strident is this?

    And it is undeniable that there are often good (and patriotic) reasons for opposing particular aspects of U.S. foreign policy.

    Senator Biden and Peter Galbraith, for instance, have advanced criticisms of our Iraq policy that one recognizes as prompted by a desire to improve U.S. policy and Iraq’s future even if one disagrees with them. John Bloom similarly wrote very strong columns criticizing the arrest and detention of Middle Eastern immigrants as terror suspects on the basis of inadequate evidence and in violation of due process. He thought such things as the unmarked detention center on New York’s lower East Side were a fall from what should be America’s high standards in civil rights. He sought to arouse the American conscience.

    And if dissent can be patriotic, it is not invariably so. After all, treason is the highest form of dissent. When “critics of the war” describe the terrorists as the equivalent of Minutemen in the Revolutionary War, or argue that the abuses at Abu Graib make Bush and Rumsfeld the equivalent of Saddam Hussein, they are crossing the boundary that separates even very strong dissent from a diseased partisanship that would prefer America to be defeated by terrorists rather than prevail under the wrong party. That partisanship is hardly distinguishable from hatred of country and gradually mutates into it.

    Doesn’t sound like a blanket denunciation of Democrats or liberals to me.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Moe Lane says:

    “Still, the stridency of these posts, even from bloggers and publications on the moderate side of the lefty blogosphere is surprising.”

    Why?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. madmatt says:

    So legitimate discussion over policy and response is now considered traitorous…then I guess the terrorists have won because you all seem to think taking away freedoms from people who don’t agree with your limited world view is ok…you should move to saudi arabia where they allow that!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. Seven Machos says:

    Such a stance is that of one that is uneducated.

    Such a sentence is that of one that is an ungrammatical ass clown.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. Tano says:

    You must understand James, that America is more than just Americans, it is the real-world expression of ideals and principles – of democracy and liberty. Any defense of America must ultimately be a defense of these principles.

    As horrible as the attacks were, they killed “only” people. Nothing that Osama or any such scum could ever do can damage our beliefs in our principles and ideals.

    Only we can do that to ourselves. This administration has relentlessly divided our nation when we need unity, undermined our Consitutional system of checks and balances, and rode roughshod over basic Constitutional principles of due process (not even mentioning their disastrous policy choices within the scope of their legitimate responsibilities). These trends, though not as dramatic as a singular event of mass murder, are ultimately more destructive of the America-as-embodiment-of-ideals than any amount of killing of indiviuals.

    Many of us non-conservatives have been thoroughly heartbroken at the spectacle of our conservative brothers and sisters seemingly responding from such a well of fear, to embrace and propel the authoritarian tendencies that Bush has embodied. Bush is the focus of this, for he is the leader, but the tendency would probably be found in any leader in such circumstances. It is why so many other countries turn to dictatorships in times of uncertainty – why indeed authoritarian dictatorship is the default political arrangement in human history.

    I dont fear that we would ever come close to such a dictatorship here in America, nor do I think that Bush and his supporters have any such explicit vision. But they have taken a few steps in that direction, and this has provoked an absolutely necessary reaction. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

    The right-wing in this country seems so fear-addled that they believe that American liberty could be damaged by terrorists. They fail to realize that the whole strategy of terrorism is to establish the circumstances under which terrorized people will defeat themselves. For America, such defeat would occur by an abandonment of our principles. We will not allow that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. Karl says:

    Osama bin Laden said in October 2001, “This battle is not between al Qaeda and the US. This is a battle of Muslims against the global crusaders.” The newly aired AQ tape contains statements of the 9/11 attackers that their actions were inspired by an urge to avenge the suffering of Muslims in Bosnia and Chechnya. The US saved Muslims in Bosnia and had nothing to do with Chechnya. So the notion that AQ is simply reacting to US foreign policy is without merit. And the notion that you are going to change the minds of religious fanatics also lacks a degree of common sense.

    As does the notion that you would allow them to control your lives our your country’s foreign policies. “They hate us” because we supported Saddam? OBL hated us because we were containing Saddam through a presence in Saudi Arabia. Now “they hate us” because we toppled Saddam. Jihadis will always find a reason to hate us, because we are infidels.

    But what about the non-jihadis in the region? Since the invasion of Iraq, favorable opinion of the US has doubled in countries like Indonesia, Pakistan, and Jordan. It dropped recently in Turkey, probably because of border problems with the Kurds. Support for sucide bombing has dropped in the region. The exception in that poll — Jordan — has joined the general opinion since 2005, after Zarqawi attacked the country.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. equitus says:

    So legitimate discussion over policy and response is now considered traitorous…

    Um, it which reality of yours did you hear this stated?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Bandit says:

    ‘So legitimate discussion over policy and response is now considered traitorous’

    Funny – I didn’t read the word traitorous until I read your comment

    ‘then I guess the terrorists have won because you all seem to think taking away freedoms from people who don’t agree with your limited world view is ok’

    Funny – I didn’t read a word about taking away freedoms until I read your comment

    ‘you should move to saudi arabia where they allow that! ‘

    WTF are you talking about?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Mark says:

    Kevin Drum links the Tomasky piece above approvingly, noting that a ceremony where Bush, Guiliani, and New York governor George Pataki lay a wreath in commemoration of the attacks on the World Trde Center without inviting any Democrats is “enough to make you ill.”

    After witnessing how Democrats behaved at the Wellstone memorial and funeral service for King’s widow, it is perfectly understandable why no Democrats were invited…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. anjin-san says:

    What sticks out in my mind amidst all this partisan sniping is the simple fact that 5 years after 9-11, Bin Laden remains at large and there has been no justice for the Americans murdered in the WTC.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. Steven Plunk says:

    I know of no laws curtailing freedom of speech or making dissent a form of treason. As well, not listening to poorly reasoned arguments is certainly not a form of censorship.

    I believe in reasonable debate with reasonable people but it’s awfully hard to have such a debate with so much Bush hatred infecting the left.

    A few posts above show just how unreasonable people can be.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Karl says:

    Shorter Tano: You must understand, James, that in the long run, Bush is worse than bin Laden.

    At least he wasn’t strident about it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. Seven Machos says:

    This administration has relentlessly divided our nation

    Which side is being divisive?

    The right-wing in this country seems so fear-addled…

    It is the left that is fear-addled — afraid that we cannot prevent murder and attacks to property without the remote possibility of maybe slightly threatening the civil rights of people who would murder and attack. Cry me a river. I’m really glad September 11 happened in September. Every election, you goofy lefists have been well-positioned to defeat this mediocre president and mediocre Congress, and every year you laughably say stuff like These trends…are ultimately more destructive of the America-as-embodiment-of-ideals than any amount of killing of indiviuals..

    Yet, somehow, conservatives are the morons. Whatever you say.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. Reid says:

    We believe that Iraq had nothing—nothing—to do with 9/11 because Saddam Hussein and his lieutenants have clearly said so, and we believe and trust them.

    LOL. Yes, Americans are uniquely evil and manipulative. All others are innocent little lambs.

    The Voice, and most of the left, only found the courage of their convictions when it was safe to do so.

    Indeed, it took awhile to gather steam, but the self-flagellation really took off when the threat receded.

    One of them being Saddam when he was useful to us.

    I.e., when the alternative was worse and his megalomaniacal tendencies were not yet revealed in stark and undeniable relief. I suppose you probably believe the canard that we supplied Saddam with his WMD, even though it is well established that his stocks of chemical weapons were of European origin.

    Tell me, Ben, do you believe the fanatical Muslim hatred and persecution of the Jews began in 1948? Do you believe we uniquely have manipulated events in the Middle East in pursuit of our national interests? Do you believe that we always have a choice between supporting the good against the bad, as opposed to the bad against the worse? Do you believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. Karl says:

    What sticks out in my mind amidst all this partisan sniping is the simple fact that 5 years after 9-11, Bin Laden remains at large and there has been no justice for the Americans murdered in the WTC.

    Yes, the fact that the Taliban was toppled, AQ leaders hide in caves, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and others are captured, etc. all mean nothing. A completely non-partisan observation there.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. Len says:

    It’s interesting that your reaction to the fifth anniversary of 9/11 is to condemn and attack the reactions of others.

    Yes, we all learned something from what happened on that day.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. Mark says:

    Tano — It seems those 3,000 dead mean little to you. I’d rather be alive, and know my loved ones are safe. If the administration has to monitor international phone calls and hold those responsible for 9/11 in Gitmo, get over it. As far as I’m concerned our response should have been a lot harsher.

    To paraphrase James Lileks, you will know when the terrorists have won when you’re DEAD, not when you’re inconvenienced in an airport security line.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  36. Seven Machos says:

    What sticks out in my mind amidst all this partisan sniping is the simple fact that 5 years after 9-11, Bin Laden remains at large and there has been no justice for the Americans murdered in the WTC.

    Can’t win with the goofy leftists. Osama bin Laden may or may not be dead. If we killed him, we would have trampled his civil rights. By leaving him alive, we are also wrong. We arrested Saddam Hussein, but taking out one man won’t make any difference. Unless it’s bin Laden. Of course, there has been no justice for the victims of 9/11. We could repeat Dresden or Hiroshima somewhere, but this would involve “disproportionate” response. And Haditha and prison torture are awful violations of civil rights.

    Let me know when you wake up from the miasma of theory and want to try to tackle some real-world problems. Until then, enjoy the view from Outofpower. I hear it’s nice there. Quiet. Peaceful.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  37. John says:

    Tano – I really don’t get the “Bush as separation of powers-busting authoritarian” argument. What civil liberties has he curtailed?

    -The right to talk to out-of-country terrorists without being monitored (arguably falling well within his intelligence-gathering powers as C-in-C)?

    -Due process: for who – non-US citizen terrorists who were captured on the battlefield acting as illegal combatants, therefore surrendering any claim to Geneva convention protections? Arabs who violated their visa obligations, and maybe were rounded up with a little bit more vigilance than usual? Jose Padilla? Well, there is an argument there.

    -Military tribunals (which the USSC found against because Congress didn’t explicitly authorize them, and which he is now working with Congress to authorize, rather than recklessly ignoring the Court)?

    -Outing a covert CIA agent out of partisan vindictiveness (oops, that was State)? In fact, isn’t the Plame affair what started most of this “authority abusing” brouhaha? Isn’t it time to walk that back now that Armitage has been exposed?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  38. Luke says:

    No, I’m not a liberal, no I’m not a dem. I’m just common sense that seems to have lost the Republican Party who favors a fantasy world over reality.

    Reality? Arms linked singing K-U-M-B-A-Y-A?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  39. [...] Then, you read this kinda shit, and wanna release the dogs and start the shooting. Filed under: Personal Stuff Comments: [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  40. Because Even Moonbats Can’t Take the Day Off…

    It’s funny how Bill Clinton receiving oral sex while on the phone with a congressman discussing troop movements is considered not “absent” from the job, but George Bush staying out of potential harm’s way while leading the nations defense while bei…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  41. rhodeymark says:

    7M – they just want OBL dead so that it will be future chic to wear him on their t-shirts. Viva la jihad! The next Dem administration – in a nod to restoring our civil rights – will not only pardon Lynne Stewart, but appoint her AG.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  42. For the ACLU, 9/11 is just another day to attack the Bush Administration…

    Nothing to honor the heroes and the victims of an unprovoked day of savagery that took the lives of 3,000 innocent Americans. No credit at all to a government and an administration, love them or hate them, that has successfully averted another horrif…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  43. Anon says:

    As someone who was actually involved in the events of 9/11 (I was working at the Pentagon), and not just watching them on TV which I assume you were, I find your post absurd.

    With the exception of the Andy Rooney quote, I agree with the posts you linked: THIS DAY IS NOT ABOUT GEORGE W. BUSH, and why the Republicans should win the election. Why is Bush using this somber day to make political points? Why did he not invite Senators Clinton and Schumer to the memorial ceremony? Those 49 percent of us who did not vote for Bush are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Those 60 percent of us who agree that the War in Iraq was a mistake are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Those 60-something percent of New Yorkers who voted for Hillary and Chuck Schumer are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Yet the President chose, and continues to choose, to attempt to paint us as not true Americans, who in the words of the Vice President yesterday “embolden” the terorists by disagreeing with the President’s policies. Disgusting.

    We have a right to be pissed off that the President and his supporters, such as you, are attempting to use this day to their political advantage.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  44. A Roundup On 9/11…

    From the left side of the blogosphere by James Joyner, who deserves an "above and beyond" citation for doing all the heavy lifting. Overall, left-leaning reaction is astonishingly negative and downright bitter. I will not …

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  45. Anon says:

    Karl, this quote from Mark Steyn on National Review Online is about as disgusting as it gets, and evidences the “Right’s” attemts to politicize 9/11 today (I put “right” in quotes because I, unlike the author of this post, do not subscribe to the idea that half the country is responsible for the comments of right-wing pundits):

    In the end, very little changed. The so-called “9/11 Democrats” are almost as invisible a presence as the “moderate Muslim,” and, insofar as one can tell, are most likely outnumbered by members of the Scowcroftian unrealpolitik Right still wedded to stability uber alles. In theory, if you’d wanted to construct an enemy least likely to appeal to the progressive Left, wife-beating gay-bashing theocrats would surely be it. But Islamism turned out to be the ne plus ultra of multiculti diversity-celebration — for what more demonstrates the boundlessness of one’s “tolerance” than by tolerating the intolerant.

    The assertion that al-Qaeda has beomce the “ne plus ultra of multiculti [sic] diversity-celebration” for the half of this country that considers itself “progressives” is a libel. He has no evidence for that, and no evidence exists. People who disagree with the President’s foreign policy do not support al Qaeda and the implied assertion that they are our heros is disgusting and ought to be denounced by those on the right. That quote makes the linked Daily Kos quote above look like nothing. You people here disgust me.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  46. dpt says:

    “Americans are puzzled over why so many people in the world hate us.”

    I’m tired of this view point as it ignores the reality of Muslim extremists killing tens and tens of thousands in Algeria, Pakistan, India, etc.

    A recent letter writer to a local paper asked more specifically that Americans need to ask “Why Arabs hate us so much?”

    Stupid question. It is like asking a black, “why does the KKK hate you so much?”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  47. Jay says:

    The problem with twits like Atrios is that heave out this nonsense about “it isn’t about him” referring to Bush when it comes to 9/11…EXCEPT when it comes to the issue of blame. Then it’s ALL ABOUT Bush.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  48. Joe says:

    Karl — this quote from Mark Steyn on National Review Online is about as disgusting as it gets, and evidences the “Right’s” attemts to politicize 9/11 today (I put “right” in quotes because I, unlike the author of this post, do not subscribe to the idea that half the country is responsible for the comments of right-wing pundits):

    In the end, very little changed. The so-called “9/11 Democrats” are almost as invisible a presence as the “moderate Muslim,” and, insofar as one can tell, are most likely outnumbered by members of the Scowcroftian unrealpolitik Right still wedded to stability uber alles. In theory, if you’d wanted to construct an enemy least likely to appeal to the progressive Left, wife-beating gay-bashing theocrats would surely be it. But Islamism turned out to be the ne plus ultra of multiculti diversity-celebration — for what more demonstrates the boundlessness of one’s “tolerance” than by tolerating the intolerant.

    The assertion that al-Qaeda has beomce the “ne plus ultra of multiculti [sic] diversity-celebration” for the half of this country that considers itself “progressives” is a libel. He has no evidence for that, and no evidence exists. People who disagree with the President’s foreign policy do not support al Qaeda and the implied assertion that they are our heros is disgusting and ought to be denounced by those on the right. That quote makes the linked Daily Kos quote above look like nothing. You people here disgust me.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  49. Esbiem says:

    My nephew today wrote, amongst other things, “in the five years since 9/11 Americans have thought and said many things that I find very sad and scary.” I responded to him that I couldn’t agree more, unfortunately, that is where the agreement ends, you see, his comments tend to parallel those noted in your post while mine seem to parallel those of Hugh Hewitt and Glenn Reynolds.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  50. Joe says:

    As someone who was actually involved in the events of 9/11 (I was working at the Pentagon), and not just watching them on TV which I assume you were, I find your post absurd.

    With the exception of the Andy Rooney quote, I agree generally with the posts you linked: THIS DAY IS NOT ABOUT GEORGE W. BUSH, and why the Republicans should win the election. Why is Bush using this somber day to make political points? Why did he not invite Senators Clinton and Schumer to the memorial ceremony? Those 49 percent of us who did not vote for Bush are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Those 60 percent of us who agree that the War in Iraq was a mistake are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Those 60-something percent of New Yorkers who voted for Hillary and Chuck Schumer are Americans who mourn 9/11 as well. Yet the President chose, and continues to choose, to attempt to paint us as not true Americans, who in the words of the Vice President yesterday “embolden” the terorists by disagreeing with the President’s policies. Disgusting.

    We have a right to be pissed off that the President and his supporters, such as you, are attempting to use this day to their political advantage.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  51. IMAO says:

    It’s All About the American Spirit and Those Who Seek to Crush It…

    James Joyner notes the odd tendency of the left to make 9/11 all about President Bush. It’s pretty sad. When……

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  52. Mr. Snitch! says:

    “It’s interesting that your reaction to the fifth anniversary of 9/11 is to condemn and attack the reactions of others.”

    Uh… isn’t that what you’re doing, Lenny old boy?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  53. [...] The Left Remembers 9/11 » Outside The Beltway | OTB There’s a different view out there, though, and it’s not just held by Muslim fanatics and our enemies across the globe but by some prominent lefties with large soapboxes. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  54. Sid says:

    “And I’m sure that if I trolled around long enough, I’d find some bloggers on the Right using the day as an occasion to bash Democrats”

    You don’t need to troll around anywhere, just listen to what the Veep had to say Sunday.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  55. Hot Air says:

    [...] James Joyner and Bob Owens round up the filthy, filthy nutroots reaction to today’s anniversary. Joyner claims he’s surprised by the tone, which must be an exceedingly dry bit at sarcasm. If you really are surprised, JJ, I assure you — you’re the only one who is. On the other hand, today above all days is an occasion to remember the enemy. Aren’t they doing that? [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  56. Seven Machos says:

    Joe — So you are angry because the President allegeldy did not invite two people you don’t even know to an event. And 60 percent of Americans agree with you? Golly, you’d think your side would, you know, have a branch of Congress or the presidency.

    Maybe it is precisely your stupid, juvenile, immature anger that is keeping your side out of power. Maybe Bush is medicore and lacks brilliance but you have no policy vision whatsoever and appear plain stupid to a majority of Americans. Maybe, if you were to elaborate on a foreign policy instead of just bitching about whatever the president does, you might win an election.

    Also, Joe, I discourage you from entering the legal profession because you have no idea whatsoever what libel is.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  57. anjin-san says:

    >Yes, the fact that the Taliban was toppled, AQ leaders hide in caves, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and others are captured, etc. all mean nothing. A completely non-partisan observation there.

    Do you dispute that Bin Laden is still at large and has not answered for his crimes? My statement is one of fact. How is it partisan?

    The Taliban is still very much alive and shipping heroin to the US, in spite of Bush’s claim (lie) that he destroyed it. The current govt in Afghanistan would fall in a month without the US military to prop it up.

    Guess taking out Saddam, who even the GOP senate says had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, was more important the finishing the job in Afghanistan. Oh yes, Mullah Omar remains at large too.

    As for AQ leaders being in caves, that is an assumption on your part, nothing more than a gop talking point.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  58. John says:

    What makes you think Clinton and Schumer weren’t invited?

    And God forbid Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al actually make arguments in favor of their policies! That’s “disgusting!” How dare they!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  59. Seven Machos says:

    anjin-san: You do not know what you are talking about on a number of levels/

    1. I do dispute that Bin Laden is still at large. He is likely dead.

    2. The Taliban is out of power in Afghanistan. It may be making money off of heroin in the sense that the FARC is making money off of cocaine. Heroin is far and away Afghanistan’s #1 cash crop and the “economy,” such as it is, of that “country,” such as you can call Afghanistan a country, depends on heroin sales. You are suggesting that the Taliban is controlling heroin sales. That’s simply wrong and belies a simplicity and misunderstanding that is all too common.

    3. The Taliban fell in less than a month without Pakistan’s support. Afghanistan is not a country in the sense that Westerners understand the term. Imagine Montana with a few basically autonomous city-states. Who controls Kabul controls Afghanistan insofar as it can be controlled.

    4. What does “finishing the job” in Afghanistan even mean? Here’s a question, foreign-policy genius: what was Afghanistan like before the Taliban?

    This is exactly why the Democrats can’t beat the Republicans, despite the absurd mediocrity of President Bush and the Republican leadership. Give the American people the choice between mediocrity and people living in a fantasy land who have no idea what they are talking about, and mediocrity will win every time.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  60. Cernig says:

    James,

    Your shallowest post ever, far below your usual standard.

    You wouldn’t have had to troll far or long – nor are we talking about insignificant insects of the blogging ecosystem.

    Michelle Malikin – the uberright’s version of an extremist Imam -

    …context the appeasers and the Islamophobia-phobes prefer to ignore, misremember, or whitewash…the jihadi-coddling Left”

    LGF:

    The latest Democratic/Islamist talking point making the rounds of the media

    Stop the ACLU simply runs a cartoon suggesting the ACLU is the true enemy US soldiers should be fighting.

    That’s number 2, 4, 7 in the TTLB. I could fill your screen with more.

    Oh, and here’s my take on the day, from a Lefty who isn’t interested in using today of all days to make political hay.

    Regards, Cernig

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  61. The Heretik says:

    Mything in Action…

    Between the wrenching views of alternately tight smiles and grim faces of today September Eleventh, when we think about attacks on our citizens, consider some of what David Cole says in Post 9/11 Shell Game: Bush found a way to put a United States cit…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  62. Pug says:

    Maybe it is precisely your stupid, juvenile, immature anger that is keeping your side out of power. Maybe Bush is medicore and lacks brilliance but you have no policy vision whatsoever and appear plain stupid to a majority of Americans. Maybe, if you were to elaborate on a foreign policy instead of just bitching about whatever the president does, you might win an election.

    They’ll teach you in any reasoning class your freshman year in college what a weasel word is, and maybe is one of them. So, Seven Machos, maybe you are right. And maybe you aren’t.

    Maybe George Bush invited no Democrats to a 9/11 memorial because he’s a “uniter, not a divider”, right? Or maybe he’s worried about losing control of Congress no matter what the occasion and saw the ceremony yesterday as a great Repbulican photo op.

    All the big talk that Democrats can’t win comes from people who won the last two presidential elections with 51% and 49% in a Supreme Court mandated electoral college victory for the loser of the popular vote. What an impressive win. People who have a huge 15 seat edge in the gerrymandered House and 5 in the Senate and a president with a 33% approval rating. Maybe a Bush dead-ender shouldn’t call others stupid.

    See, Seven, I’m not angry at all. Maybe it’s because I think things are about to get better.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  63. Tano says:

    Seven,

    You dont make a convincing case of being amongst those who “know what they are talking about”.

    To wit:
    There is a fair amount of evidence that bin Laden has recently been alive. And zero evidence that he is dead. Thus you desire to believe him dead speaks only to your willingness to believe what you wish, rather than what the evidence points to.

    Heroin has become, once again, the mainstay of the Afghan economy. It wasnt under the Taliban. It fluorishes in direct proportion to the weakness of the central government.

    The apporpriate question to ask is not what Afghanistan was like before the Taliban, but rather what it was like under the Taliban. They had effective control of most all of the country, belieing your claim that Afghanistan is inherintly and necessarily a pathchwork of ungovernable regions.

    Finishing the job in Afghanistan means defeating the Taliban once and for all, and capturing bin Laden and Zawahiri. Why does this need to be explained to you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  64. Seven Machos says:

    It is precisely your stupid, juvenile, immature anger that is keeping your side out of power. Bush is medicore and lacks brilliance but you have no policy vision whatsoever and appear plain stupid to a majority of Americans. If you were to elaborate a foreign policy instead of bitching about whatever the president does, you might win an election.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  65. Anderson says:

    (1) Where does Dinesh “The Cultural Left & Its Responsibility for 9/11″ D’Souza fit?

    (2) 5 years after 9/11, we haven’t even *indicted* Osama for 9/11. Is it because there’s no evidence that can be presented to a grand jury? Whose fault is *that*?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  66. [...] I’ve been thinking as I’ve watched the ceremonies today that it must really bother the left that they haven’t played much of a prominent role but I think it’s fitting considering that they can’t be trusted to behave themselves. The left are just like bratty children, who, when they have an audience, can be expected to throw a temper tantrum. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  67. James Joyner says:

    Anderson: D’Souza isn’t a blogger, so far as I know. I’ve liked a lot of the stuff he’s written but that whole argument strikes me as silly. Steve Verdon had a post on that the other day, if fact.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  68. Seven Machos says:

    Tano — You are simply wrong.

    Heroin has been the mainstay of the Afghan economy for decades.

    The Taliban never had effective control of most all of the country. The Taliban controlled Kabul and a few other cities. Life for the average non-city dweller in Afghanistan has not changed for centuries. Most of Afghanistan is remote, largely uninhabited, and cannot be controlled politically.

    How do you propose “defeating the Taliban once and for all”? Firebombing? Nuclear weapons? Those are your best options. There is also the complete militarization of the economy that would involve drafting most able-bodied men into the military. Let me know your choice, and we can go from there.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  69. tommy says:

    Tano

    You are “only” an asshat.

    The strategy of terrorists isn’t to force us to defeat ourselves. The strategy of terrorists is to force us to surrender to their demands.

    It is funny how the American Left is always whining about supposed right-wing “fearmongering” simple because some point out that our enemies are determined and won’t be defeated easily and that we are in this battle for the long haul. This from the side of the aisle that indulges in absurd conspiracy theories about 9/11, tries to convice us that Bush is Hitler and the Patriot Act is the end of freedom as we know it, that Bush has cost us our (once solid) support from such reliable and useful international partners as Jacque Chirac, etc. etc.

    The new motto of the American Left: “Bush is Doom! DOOM I SAY!”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  70. tommy says:

    Sorry about the typo. I meant “simply” not “simple.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  71. Anderson says:

    D’Souza isn’t a blogger, so far as I know

    Thank god–he’s not up to our quality standards!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  72. Jon says:

    “We do create people that hate us by supporting Israel so strongly.”

    And just how have we supported Israel so strongly? We didn’t even stand by them long enough in their most recent military activity to let them demolish Hellbollah. We don’t support Israel anywhere near as strongly as we should, not this administration anyway.
    Besides, are you saying we shouldn’t stand up for what we believe in because we might make enemies or make people hate us? That doesn’t sound like a good enough reason to abandon support of your friends, especially when they share so many of your western democratic values. If you don’t have enemies than you have probably never stood up for anything in your life. Sometimes you just have to do what you feel is right… something few leftists will undertand

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  73. Mr. Snitch! says:

    “See, Seven, I’m not angry at all. Maybe it’s because I think things are about to get better.”

    Of course they are, Pug. Events are going to do a 180 in your favor. Right around Fitzmas.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  74. Karl says:

    As for Joe’s reference to Mark Steyn’s comment, I would note that his sole reference to Democrats is in the first sentence, in remarking that “9/11 Democrats” seem scarce these days. And considering that Joe Lieberman went from the Veep candidate to being repudiated by his party in the course of a couple of years, the protests against Sens. Clinton and Cantwell, etc. I’d say he’s right.

    The remainder of his comments refer to the progressive Left, which Steyn may define differently from Joe (esp. since I doubt Joe can produce any evidence that half of the country considers itself “progressive”), but which in any event is not a direct comment on Democrats, which was what James mentioned.

    And while Joe claims Steyn has no evidence for his comments, the comments of people like Rooney are in fact evidence of it. The entire “why do they hate us?” mindset, untethered from a consideration or understanding of who the enemy actually is, is the direct result of a warped, knee-jerk mutliculturalism. As I noted above, people in countries in the region actually hate us less today than they did before the US invaded Iraq. As I also noted above, the 9/11 attackers considered it a response to their grievances about Bosnia and Chechnya — neither of which were the product of US policy. I’m sure that doesn’t fit in Rooney’s pre-existing stereotypes of Muslims or Arabs or even terrorists, but that’s his problem.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  75. Ring says:

    Oddly enough, what struck me was that nobody in the quotes above could condemn or even remember the actions on 9/11 without attacking Bush. I think they are worried that any sympathy for 9/11 would be seen to have “bought into” the presidents plan, so they justify it with a bit of Bush bashing.

    As for the old “we deserved it”, this angle is political suicide for the dems.Seriously, what rape victim would want a prosecutor that personally believes that she was “asking for it”?
    Lets not of course forget all those other parts of the world, that have nothing whatsoever to do with US foreign policy, that are under seige by people who just so happen to be muslim.

    People who disagree with the President’s foreign policy do not support al Qaeda and the implied assertion that they are our heros is disgusting and ought to be denounced by those on the right.

    And yet strangely enough, the left spend 99% of their time attacking the president, and anything anti-terrorist, and none of it actually attacking the very people that want to kill them. As they say, you are judged by your actions. When was the last time a democrat or a lefty blogger called for tough action against terrorism that wasn’t some veiled attack on Bush to imply he wasn’t doing his job right? The only one I can think of is Lieberman and he was just pretty much ejected from the party. It’s not that we think you are “for” terrorists, just that you seemed opposed at all costs to anything stopping them here and abroad.

    Perhaps when those on the left (academia, media, blogs, democrats etc..) stop acting like the cheering squad for the insurgency and show even half the concern to US troops, Islamofascism, and terrorist threats as they do for people in Guantanamo, then perhaps their motives might be judged a little better.

    If Bush said the sky was blue, the left would do it’s best to dispute it just so they don’t appear to lend any credence to Bush. I believe there was an article the other week about journalists where they were downplaying these issues rather than agree with Bush.

    Pure childishness.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  76. Seven Machos says:

    Look, this is the thing people don’t understand about Israel: before 1948, the history of the Middle East had been 200 years of unmitigated peace, harmony, and economic success. Then, the dastardly Jewish people had to come in and screw it all up. You can imagine how angry the world is that the USA would support such a country — warmongers and such a drag on the overall GDP of the region.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  77. mishu says:

    Taliban us, anjin-san, what does Taliban heroin look like? What color is it? What kind of buzz do you get off of it? In other words, can you offer proof that Talibanâ„¢ heroin has made it to the U.S.?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  78. tommy says:

    Seven Machos,

    The only thing showing is your lack of knowledge about Mideast history. Here is one of many not-so-peaceful events from before 1948:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre

    The Mideast was not “economically prosperous” either. It was a complete backwater before the discovery and large-scale exploitation of petroleum.

    Anderson writes:

    “5 years after 9/11, we haven’t even *indicted* Osama for 9/11. Is it because there’s no evidence that can be presented to a grand jury? Whose fault is *that*?”

    Bill Clinton, I suppose.

    Actually, I think most are hoping that a 500 lb. bomb is dropped on Osama; not that we get to see him in court represented by F. Lee Bailey. There are some of us who are not looking for a law enforcement solution to terrorism any longer.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  79. Seven Machos says:

    No shit, Tommy. My last post was 100 percent sarcasm. I would hope that you are the only person who has read it that would fail to see that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  80. tommy says:

    OK, Seven Machos. I thought you might be making that comment sarcastically. I apologize.

    Believe it or not, I run into the very sort of attitude you are satirizing reguarly on many Arab blogs. Many people really believe that all was well-and-good before the creation of Israel.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  81. Blacksheep says:

    I don’t mean to suggest that most people on the Left don’t mourn the tragedy of 9/11, hate America, or any such nonsense.

    OK, then, I’ll say it: most people on the left (at least the far left) don’t mourn the tragedy of 9/11, and most appear to hate America.

    I don’t know why you would think that’s nonsense; I think it’s self-evident.

    I mean, read their web sites, where the leftys gather to drop their phoniness and commisserate together. See them wish death on our President, observe as they cheer our military difficulties, try to comprehend their utter hatred of everything that’s fine, and good, and worthy of respect in this country. Explain for us why the terrorists are quoting the left’s own words to further their vile causes.

    I too wish these things weren’t so, but they are, and I’m frankly no longer surprised by it. Horrified? No doubt. But surprised? Not anymore.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  82. Anderson says:

    Actually, I think most are hoping that a 500 lb. bomb is dropped on Osama; not that we get to see him in court represented by F. Lee Bailey. There are some of us who are not looking for a law enforcement solution to terrorism any longer.

    Really? I would *love* to see Osama in court, represented by the best lawyer that his money can buy. I happen to believe in the American system of government, you see, & to be quite proud of it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  83. harry says:

    The only thing as certain as bloggers on the Left attacking Bush on the anniversary of 9/11 is bloggers on the Right attacking bloggers the Left for attacking Bush on the anniversary of 9/11.

    Congratulations: you’ve helped complete the circle of idiocy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  84. Ring says:

    There is a fair amount of evidence that bin Laden has recently been alive. And zero evidence that he is dead. Thus you desire to believe him dead speaks only to your willingness to believe what you wish, rather than what the evidence points to.

    What evidence? An audio tape that the US and the Arab World tells us is Bin Laden, even though they both have something to gain by it being Bin Laden, and his being still alive?
    Why no video that isn’t just ‘stock footage’ with a voiceover? Why no video with him talking about recent events, even holding up a recent newspaper? He made one shortly after 9/11 but nothing in the last couple of years. Why so?

    Given the condition of his kidneys a few years ago and the fact that there’s no easy way to obtain dialysis while hiding in a cave, I doubt very much that he is alive, and that is excluding the possibility that he is buried under tons of rubble.
    Given that he is likely dead, and there is only weak signs that indicate otherwise, my money is on dead.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  85. tommy says:

    Really? I would *love* to see Osama in court, represented by the best lawyer that his money can buy. I happen to believe in the American system of government, you see, & to be quite proud of it.

    Yeah, I’m sure you would be proud of it. But then, many would be happy to see Osama get life in a Supermax rather than the death penalty. After all, death would be giving him the “martyrdom” that he so desparately seeks, right? Or maybe you want to see him dead, but only after he gets to spend 10-15 years on death row making a media spectacle out of himself and writing his autobiography.

    I don’t believe that we should extend Geneva Convention protections to enemies who don’t fight according to internationally-accepted standards of war. Likewise, I don’t think we need extend our Constitutional rights to non-citizens who wage war on our country, either.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  86. Seven Machos says:

    I’ve done it myself, Tommy. It’s good to meet people who are on your side.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  87. Bush and 9/11…

    BUSH AND 9/11….James Joyner, noting the harsh tone evident in many of the lefty blogosphere’s 9/11 posts today, says that “the stridency of these posts, even from bloggers and publications on the moderate side of the lefty blogosphere is surprising…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  88. Seven Machos says:

    The idea that the legal justice system and the military intersect is a strange one. As if killing 3000 people is just an ordinary crime. People who think the military — a group of mean, armed men that regularly kills people and destroys property and goes completely against all manner of social mores for a living, as their job — should be intertwined with the district attorney and the polcie force are sick and twisted and they don’t understand the world.

    I’m not sure where this novel, disgusting idea comes from. They won’t win elections, though, not here, no matter how mediocre the opposition.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  89. Anderson says:

    Given the condition of his kidneys a few years ago and the fact that there’s no easy way to obtain dialysis while hiding in a cave, I doubt very much that he is alive, and that is excluding the possibility that he is buried under tons of rubble.

    Lawrence Wright debunks the kidney-disease story in The Looming Tower, and makes a good circumstantial case for Addison’s disease.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  90. 9/11: FIVE YEARS AFTER…

    New Media The Left and 9/11: James Joyner seems surprised to find more hostility for George Bush that for those who perpetrated the September 11th attacks from some liberal/left sources. CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden said more than 5,000……

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  91. Fen says:

    it might be better if we figured out how to behave as a nation in a way that wouldn’t make so many people in the world want to kill us.

    “We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you.” – Hussein Massawi, Hezbollah

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  92. Five Years…

    Five years ago, the largest terrorist attack ever conducted culminated in the murder of nearly 3,000 people, the destruction of the World Trade Center, devastated Lower Manhattan, badly damaged the Pentagon, wreaked havoc on the airline industry, and…..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  93. calling all toasters says:

    I see your point, Joyner. I mean, this is the holy day of Remembering Bush’s Nobility–see the headline stories on ANY major news outlet, much less ABC’s hackumentary if you don’t believe that’s how it’s being played. Why, then, can’t we “all just get along?”

    P.S. Overlook that we were attacked on one day five years ago, and for the last five years minus one day there has been a relentless campaign by the right to exploit that tragedy in the name of warmongering, torture, domestic spying, government secrecy, fiscal irresponsibility, corruption, demagoguery, scapegoating, and divisiveness.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  94. [...] The Right Nation Outside the Beltway chronicles BDS [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  95. tommy says:

    it might be better if we figured out how to behave as a nation in a way that wouldn’t make so many people in the world want to kill us.

    Yes. Canadians also. After all, they just busted up a terrorist operation up north.

    Damn imperialistic neo-con Canadians! Always causing trouble. Why can’t they be more likeable…

    …you know, like those wonderful and gentle souls, the Arabs, that Rooney obviously so admires.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  96. Jim says:

    Bush used 9/11 to lie the country into Iraq, which he then turned into a huge disaster. Rumsfeld is still in power. Condi P.D.B. Rice has been promoted. Cheney is still lying about Saddam’s connection to Al Qaeda. Jerry Bremer and George Tenet are the owners of Presidential Medals of Freedom. First Responders in New York are sick from the poisons in the air that this Administration denied were there and are now cutting funding for them.

    What better day to express contempt and anger for the worst administration in the history of this country, and some of the most dangerously incompetent and dishonest people to ever wield political power?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  97. RW says:

    Just so I’m reading Drum correctly, if only Bush had adopted some Democratic proposals (raising tax cuts, praising gay marriage) the Democrats would have acted more like Republicans did when FDR was leading the country during WWII instead of modern day Democrats who stonewall almost every war initiative and then bitch and complain about the ones they DO vote for.

    And, it’s Bush’s fault that the Dems are so partisan.

    Gotcha.

    No, we’re not surprised, Kevin. You lost many of us when you thought Bill Burkette a believable person (you remember that, don’t you?) during the early days of Bush derangement syndrome.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  98. michael says:

    Gee, do you think if Andy and his friends just gathered themselves into boxcars and told the jihadist designated trainmaster just to take them to where they could display their enhuisasm for understanding things would be better? Anna Freud asked her father, when the real Nazis took over Vienna, if they should commit suicide. His repsonse was, ‘Do you think they would like us better then?’ conveying that that was the point of her question and that it was not the best question.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  99. tommy says:

    What better day to express contempt and anger

    Actually, just about any day would be better. Besides, expressing contempt and anger is what the Democrats do practically every day.

    for the worst administration in the history of this country

    Now that is just unfair! I haven’t seen any contempt expressed by the Democrats towards the Carter administration. None whatsoever.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  100. calling all toasters says:

    Ah yes, I remember when Carter lied us into war against a country that hadn’t … er … broke the law repeatedly and said he would do it again … uh … stole the presiden … hmmmm.

    He wore that bloody cardigan and said the word “malaise”! That’s it! Gotcha Mr. Peanut!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  101. [...] One of the remarkable aspects of 9/11 is that it is an event that clearly divides us (and by “us” I mean Americans) as much as it divides us. This may not be true for everyday Americans, but it is clearly true for many in the commentariat. While it no doubt leads to excessive jingosim on the part of some, it also, it would seem, allows for a great deal of vitriol on the part of others. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  102. Jim says:

    When was the last time a democrat or a lefty blogger called for tough action against terrorism that wasn’t some veiled attack on Bush to imply he wasn’t doing his job right?

    “Tough” action? Like the bombers and bunkerbusters that stopped the British-based attacks last month? real action against terrorism doesn’t get broadcast on teevee to make button-mushroomed, bedwetting, chickenhawk Bush supporters feel vicariously “tough”. We know all the armchair green berets, barstool Special Forces and the heroic swashbucklers of 101st Fighting Keyboardists like to think they’re very “tough” because they cheered from their barcaloungers when our draft-dodging AWOL president sent other people’s sons to attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, but what you all so contemptously dismiss as “law enforcement”, intelligence, is what stops terrorist attacks.

    And before you start blathering about Bush’s illegal spying operations, the British investigators who uncovered that plot had warrants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  103. [...] UPDATE II: Outside the Beltway with more “remembrances” from the Left. Notice on this day when the left accused President Bush of being “political”, it’s ever what they may the day – from their warped perspective – to be. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  104. [...] Remember, these are not fringe lunatics, culled to show the left in a bad light, they are the thought leaders of the left, the best and brightest they have to offer in the blogosphere. If you can stomach it, James has more, much more. Filed in: New Media, War On Terror | No Comments » [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  105. tommy says:

    Ah yes, I remember when Carter lied us into war against a country that hadn’t … er … broke the law repeatedly and said he would do it again … uh … stole the presiden … hmmmm.

    Funny. I don’t remember Carter doing any of that. But then, I don’t recall any president in recent memory actively lying us into a war or stealing the presidency.

    I do recall a certain Jimmuh who, through his typically tough guy Democrat foreign policy stance, helped the now nuclear-bound ayatollahs take power in Iran, among other disasters.

    Actually, Carter really was a tough guy in one respect:

    For those lefties who like to pin the blame the rise of bin Laden to US involvement in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, it was actually the Carter administration and specifically, Carter’s advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, that started the effort to aid the mujahideen in Afgahnistan. That is a fact frequently (and conveniently) forgotten by the left.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  106. tommy says:

    “Tough” action? Like the bombers and bunkerbusters that stopped the British-based attacks last month?

    No. More like the tough multicultural policies disasterously pursued by the left throughout Europe that have let countless unassimilated and possibly, unassimilatable, Pakistani Muslims into the country.

    We know all the armchair green berets, barstool Special Forces

    We do know those armchair warriors. People like Iraq Veterans Against the War’s former Army Ranger/Navy SEAL Jesse MacBeth:

    LINK
    LINK
    LINK

    [Edited to fix page formatting problem created by pasting long URL -ed.]

    And before you start blathering about Bush’s illegal spying operations, the British investigators who uncovered that plot had warrants.

    The British system for obtaining those warrants is so loose that it strongly resembles the recent use of warrantless eavesdropping in the U.S. Indeed, the left would be crying foul if British eavesdropping tactics in this case were used in the United States.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  107. DMonteith says:

    Damn those lefty democrats! After all, they caused the deficit, the 9/11 attacks, the problems in Iraq (aid and comfort, baby, aid and comfort…), and all the deaths in New Orleans.

    You know, we really could do with a lot less criticism of the way things are going these days. I thought we had decided that criticism was treason. Whatever happened to that?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  108. tommy says:

    I thought we had decided that criticism was treason.

    That decision was made unilaterally by the left. Along with such other decisions as:

    (1) The neo-cons were behind 9/11 (or, at least, knew it was coming)
    2) Karl Rove is the source of all evil in this world. Except for those evils for which Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were not responsible for.
    3) Bush stole the presidency twice.
    3) Bush is as bad as Hitler, maybe worse.

    Conservatives never consented to any of these interpretations of reality.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  109. [...] Outside The Beltway [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  110. DMonteith says:

    I know what you mean, man! I can’t swing a cat in the liberal blogosphere without hitting dozens of pinkos raging about how Bush has probably killed millions more people than the 20 million or so that Hitler killed. It’s rampant over there! Plus, they all believe that Wolfowitz masterminded 9/11 (non-snarky aside: WTF?).

    The handful of nutjobs that actually believe this crap are obviously only saying what their cowardly overlords wish they could say! I am going to completely dismiss everything any traitorous lefty commie says because I have just proven their essentially cowardly moonbattiness! Traitors!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  111. There is one downside to an Instalanche, it releases more trolls than are kept in the mines of Moria.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  112. Tano says:

    It is constantly amazing to me to see how the right-wingers seem incapable of keeping more than one or two ideas in their heads, and are drowning in venomous bile toward those of their fellow citizens who do try to keep track of things. If you want to see real derangement syndrome – just read the RW bloggers and commenters, including in this thread.

    To remind people of some pertinent facts.

    When we were attacked on 9/11, the president launched an attack on the Taliban (after apparantly needing to be dissuaded from going directly to Iraq). The resolution in Congress to approve that action passed 99-0 in the Senate, and with just one no vote in the House. The nation was united. There was zero reluctance from the Democrats about going to war against those who attacked us.

    The PATRIOT act was also passed with little opposition, even though legislators had little time to consider all the ramifications of its provisions – barely time to read it. Whatever opposition to the act that later arose was always very specifically focused on one or two provisions that were problematical, never with the whole bill itself.

    After flubbing the situation at Tora Bora, and allowing bin Laden to escape, Bush pulled most of the special forces out to prepare for the Iraq invasion (even though he would continue to lie to the American people for over a year about “no decision having been made yet”.

    Herein lies the great source of all the terrible division and seeming hatred that has grown up amongst our own citzenry. It really reduces down to two simple positions.

    Dems and libs feel that the enemy is al-Qaeda, that they are the ones that attacked us, that they are the ones that need to be defeated. That requires military force in Afghanistan, no quitting (or massive scaleback) after Tora Bora, plus enormous amounts of international policing work to rout out the cells that are dispersed across the world (and hence the need for excellent cooperative relations with other nations).

    The Republicans and right-wingers seem to have reflexivly bought into the Bush strategy of invading Iraq as part of the WOT. It was a nonsense, stupid idea, and it really amazes me that so few RWers felt any need to think it over for themselves before lending their support. The reason that lefties have so little respect for the right is that the right seems to have completely adopted the sheep mentality, following the leader no matter how stupid his policies, and foregoing any attempt at independent critical thought.

    That Iraq has been a disaster, especially if seen as a “front in the WOT” is indisputable. What was a secular repressive regime is now a chaotic place, where one third of the country is in quasi-direct control of Iran (another enemy of ours), another third is supposedly friendly to us, but harbors Marxist guerilla groups that are fomenting sepratist movements in our NATO ally Turkey, and the last third of the country is in the hands of Baathists and al-Qaeda, and may well be serving as a far better training ground for them than what they had in Afghanistan. 2600 American lives, and 300 billion dollars have bought us a worse situation than we faced in Jan. 2002.

    This is the heart of the dispute. It is not about appeasment, or fascism, or patriotism or the lack of it. It is not a dispute that will be resolved by endlessly coming up with cutting insults to hurl at your fellow citizens. From my perspective the essential question is this. Are the RWers emotionally capable of recognizing that, whatever his intentions, Bush has made profoundly stupid moves in the war against al-Qaeda? He has turned Iraq into a far more dangerous, and far more of a failed state than it ever was before – and has undermined our standing in the world and thus our ability to win cooperation in the non-military aspects of the struggle.

    If we could all agree on the obvious, we might discover that we really are on the same side in the real fight.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  113. jpe says:

    Honestly, “remembrance” is kinda gay. That’s all I have to say on the subject. You’re all totally gay.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  114. jpe says:

    I can’t swing a cat in the liberal blogosphere without hitting dozens of pinkos raging about how Bush has probably killed millions more people than the 20 million or so that Hitler killed.

    This is a good argument for an IQ requirement for voting.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  115. boris says:

    He has turned Iraq into a far more dangerous, and far more of a failed state than it ever was before …

    … If we could all agree on the obvious

    Pretty much lost it right there.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  116. [...] James Joyner and Bob Owens round up the filthy, filthy nutroots reaction to today’s anniversary. Joyner claims he’s surprised by the tone, which must be an exceedingly dry bit of sarcasm. If you really are surprised, JJ, I assure you — you’re the only one who is. On the other hand, today above all days is an occasion to remember the enemy. Aren’t they doing that? [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  117. Brown Line says:

    Andy Rooney opined that “… it might be better if we figured out how to behave as a nation in a way that wouldn’t make so many people in the world want to kill us.”

    Oddly, I can think of one highly placed person who agrees with Rooney, at least implicitly, when he said:

    “We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle East. [Britain and the United States], in the past, have been willing to make a bargain, to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability. Longstanding ties often led us to overlook the faults of local elites. Yet this bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It merely bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of violence took hold.

    “… we cannot turn a blind eye to oppression just because the oppression is not in our own backyard. No longer should we think tyranny is benign because it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to its victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny wherever it is found.”

    That, of course, was George W. Bush, speaking at Whitehall in November 2003.

    The fact is that before the invasion of Iraq, we were at war with Saddam Hussein. Our warplanes enforced the no-fly zones that protected the Kurdish north and the Shi’ite south. We regularly bombed targets in Iraq, and exchanged fire with Iraq anti-aircraft batteries.

    But that was coming to an end. One way or another, the oil-for-food enterprise – which enriched both Saddam and his selected allies abroad at the expense of Iraqi lives (just how many is a matter of dispute) – was coming to an end. We were confronting a stark choice: overthrow Hussein, or stand down and let him reassert his control over the entire country.

    This point is made most clearly by Senator McCain in his address to the RNC in August 2004.

    Now, Bush’s critics may prefer the Kissingeresque tactic of propping up a tyrant in order to keep the lid nailed down. The Eisenhower administration played that game when they installed the Shah in Iran. The Kennedy administration thought the Ba’athists would be more tractable, and supported their coup in Iraq. for the Ba’athists in Iraq. President Carter and President Reagan, in a fine example of using tyranny to preserve stability, supported both sides in the 1979 Iraq-Iran war, a conflict that ultimately cost a million Iraqis and Iranians their lives.

    Of course, those administrations were primarily concerned with the Cold War; smaller nations were merely pawns in the game. But it’s painfully obvious now that that policy is bankrupt. And now that the Cold War is over, we are reaping what we have sown, in Iran, Iraq, and elsewhere.

    Bush may well have miscalculated. And his execution of the war may well have blundered – though the conflict is a long way from being over. But Bush audaciously attempted to use the situation in Iraq – a “republic of fear”, weak militarily and falling apart internally – to attempt to change the nature of politics in the Middle East. He thought that it was worth the attempt, especially since the only real alternative was to stand aside and let Hussein carry out another mass slaughter of Shi’ites and Kurds.

    In the Whitehall address, Bush repeatedly invoked the name of Woodrow Wilson – another president with an audacious vision of changing the politics of a continent. Wilson’s vision was crushed by isolationist Republicans who refused to ratify Versailles or join the League of Nations. Today, I think, the names of the parties have changed, but the situation is much the same: isolationist Democratic “liberals” who continue “to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability”, versus international-minded Republican “conservatives” who are trying to change the politics of the Middle East in the direction of liberty.

    At least, that’s how I see it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  118. tommy says:

    First Tano starts out:

    It is constantly amazing to me to see how the right-wingers seem incapable of keeping more than one or two ideas in their heads,

    Later:

    Dems and libs feel that the enemy is al-Qaeda

    and

    It was a nonsense, stupid idea, and it really amazes me that so few RWers felt any need to think it over for themselves before lending their support.

    Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats had the foresight to point out, prior to our war in Iraq, that Iraq wasn’t the issue, al-Qaeda was, and that is why all the Democrats refused to authorize any war in Iraq. You remember all those Democrats who declared that Saddam Hussein wasn’t a threat and that no action against Saddam was necessary, don’t you?

    Yes, you remember that, don’t you: the way the Democrats dug in, stuck to their guns, and refused to give the President any leeway in launching a war on Iraq – especially with unfinished business in Afghanistan? John Kerry, for example.

    Who can’t keep their facts straight, Tano? Democrats have a way of quickly forgetting inconvenient truths.

    has undermined our standing in the world and thus our ability to win cooperation in the non-military aspects of the struggle.

    Ahh! Generalities without specifics. Tell me a few specific incidences where foreign governments have refused to cooperate with us because of our involvement in Iraq, Tano. Provide me with a few examples, will you?

    Dems and libs feel that the enemy is al-Qaeda

    Many Dems, like Michael Moore, say that terrorism is not a threat. “There is no terrorist threat.” Time and again they demonstrate how nonchalant they are about terrorism. Many Dems feel that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove/Halliburton is the only threat to our nation.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  119. tommy says:

    Brown Line makes some excellent points.

    Chomsky and other darlings of the left have long criticized the United States for propping up dicators, for supporting dictators, for dealing with dictators, and for failing stand against dictators who were American allies.

    Now the United States is being criticized for failing to prop up a dictator, for daring to remove a dictator.

    The Left wants to have both ways. The United States is damned if we do and damned if we don’t. The Left criticized Bush Sr. for not deposing Saddam, for not caring about the Iraqi people. Now Bush Jr. is being attacked for taking that wonderful man, Saddam, out of power.

    Unlike most conservatives and, for that matter, most liberals (though the mainstream left has tried to forget their own fairly enthusiastic support for this venture in its early days), I didn’t support the war in Iraq because I don’t believe that winning hearts and minds constitutes a concrete military objective and because I don’t consider the prospects of any Islamic society becoming truly democratic to be very good. Yet, I believed that if we were going to go into Iraq anyway, that we should try to find the WMDs, capture Saddam, and immediately partition the country and let the natives sort it out.

    Bush didn’t do that, and I think it was a bad mistake.

    Still, I can’t help but be disgusted by the spineless nature of the left in the GWoT and their attempts to pretend they never supported the war in Iraq. During periods when the war seemed to be going well (such as when the invasion was initially launched or the statue of Saddam was toppled) they have acted like they supported the war enthusiastically, when it hasn’t (such as when Tommy Frank’s push northward encountered some resistance, when looting became a problem, or when the insurgency seemed intractable) they have acted like they never supported this venture. Their only consistency has been their inconsistency.

    The fecklessness and waffling of the left demonstrates they cannot be trusted to make hard decisions and keep to them. That is a very dangerous characteristic when you are dealing with an enemy as implacable as the jihadists.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  120. anjin-san says:

    Machos,

    What are you talking about? I, for one, would be happy to see Bin Laden in front of a firing squad. In my mind, that would be justice for the victims of 9-11.

    Given Bush’s failure to bring him to justice, it is not hard to see why you want to cloud the waters of the discussion, but please try and avoid obvious nonsense. No democrat I know has voiced all too much concerns about OBL’s “civil rights”.

    As for Saddam, even the GOP Senate has concluded that he had no Al-Qaeda ties and the administrations rationalizations for the war in Iraq are nonsense.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  121. Simon Clow says:

    I know of no laws curtailing freedom of speech
    Posted by: Steven Plunk at September 11, 2006 15:45 Permalink

    Steven, Bush signed McCain-Feingold, the most egregious attack on political speech in this country since the Sedition Acts.

    That was maybe his lowest moment – a President shouldn’t sign a law which is clearly against the spiriti of the Bill of Rights in the vain hope that the Supremes may show more courage than he does.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  122. Tano says:

    tommy,

    Deciding not to invade Iraq does not equal propping up a dictator.

    The left did not criticize Bush Sr. for not taking out Saddam. To the contrary, most on the left agreed with Bush Sr. that the alliance that he had constructed was built on the agreement that we would expel Saddam from the soverign country that he had invaded, period. That was the mandate we sought and recieved from the UN.

    No one on the left considers Saddam a wonderful man. Nor would most, certainly not I, have any problem with him being removed – given the right circumstances. But an Iraq War as part of the WOT, and as a constructed “central front” in that war, carried out a the critical moment when the WOT needed to enter the more difficult phase (after the first military victory in Afghanistan) made no sense.

    I never claimed that all Democrats saw the problem with the Iraq War from the beginning. Speaking just for myself, I tried my best to listen carefully to the arguments, and I was certainly moved by the visions of a fluorishing democracy, and troubled by the seeming consensus on WMD. It was hard for me to decide whether or not to support the war. But in the end, I found Powell strangely unconvincing at the UN, I began to sense that Bush and the RW were not interested in persuading but rather bulldozing their already made decision, and as much as I tried to listen for it, I never heard convincing arguments to lead me to believe that this administration knew what they were getting into. So I was against the war, but it was a close call. Many other Dems came down on the other side – full of hope that whatever concerns they might have would prove to be groundless.

    Nonetheless, whatever opposition there was, came from the left. And it seemed to me that whatever critical thinking there was, even if it led to hopeful assent, was also coming exclusivly from the left. And I think that speaks very badly of the performance of the right. This administration certainly doesn’t listen to Dems, or people like me. But they do listen to the right, and the right failed them massively – oddly enough, by giving such uncritical support. Y’all seem to be a bloc of yes-men, when the boss needed sober advice.

    I think your solution for Iraq is not well thought out. Take out Saddam and leave chaos in our wake. The result would have been what we have now, only worse.

    Making hard decisions and sticking to them is an admirable quality, when the hard decisions that you have made are the correct ones. When they are bad decisions, then sticking with them leads one over the cliff.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  123. anjin-san says:

    I keep seeing “Bin Laden is dead/probably dead” popping up in arguments made by Bush supporters.

    If this is the case, why did Bush mention him 16 times in his recent WOT speech?

    So what is it? Is Bin Laden dead, and Bush is simply cravenly using his name to evoke fear because the GOP is sinking like a stone?

    Or is he alive, and Bush knows he is alive?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  124. Webloggin says:

    The Berkeley School of Journalism Remembers 9/11…

    The Berkeley School of Journalism Remembers 9/11
    The 5th anniversary of 9/11 means many things to many people of all walks of life. For me it was a chance to look into the lives of those who were taken away by the senseless and cowardly acts of terro…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  125. Tano says:

    Couldn’t resist adding this to the discussion, for it addresses some concerns raised above.

    John Woo, one of the chief Justice Dept. lawyers in the days after 9/11, respsonsible for so much of the creeping authoritarianism of this administration (or at least its legal justifications) wrote this in his recent book.

    “We are used to a peacetime system in which Congress enacts the laws, the president enforces them, and the courts interpret them. In wartime, the gravity shifts to the executive branch.”

    Combine that with the oft-stated view that this will be a very long war, essentially a permanent war, and perhaps you can see why civil libertarian concerns are very real. They wish to permanently change the essential formula of our American democracy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  126. Ray says:

    “I think your solution for Iraq is not well thought out. Take out Saddam and leave chaos in our wake. The result would have been what we have now, only worse.”

    Actually, there is very little chaos in Iraq. Insurgency attacks, which I assume you refer to as chaos, are occurring in only two or three areas in Iraq, mostly in an area less than one third of the size of the country. Most of the country is quite peaceful. I have a nephew in Iraq who’s back for his second tour and he has not seen any combat, as is true of most of the troops stationed there. If chaos is so rampant, as you suggest, then why haven’t there been more causalities amongst the Allied troops like America and Briton?

    The truth is, the chaos you suggest is actually limited to a few areas in Iraq and is directed by those who wish to destabilise the current government and are directed towards those that support that government, a government that was elected by the citizens of Iraq.

    Democracies are not built over night and I believe the people of Iraq deserve better than to call their country and its new government a failure. They have worked long and hard to rebuild their country after Saddam and his tyrannical government have been removed and they deserve our respect and continued support. Wouldn’t you agree?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  127. triticale says:

    How long did it take after Pearl Harbor to get Yamamoto, and that only thru a lucky intelligence intercept?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  128. Seven Machos says:

    anjin-san — I think Osama bin Laden is dead but I cannot confirm it. You cannot confirm that he is alive or dead. Neither can Bush. Very few people can. As such, all we can do is speculate and make prudent policy and do the very best we can with the information we have.

    I know you think your nifty little paradox wrapped in a riddle is cute. It’s not. The sad fact is that Bush is acting like the most serious leader, and is doing his best in the face of grave threats to national security. If Democrats would only do the same in just an average way, they could win many elections. They refuse. They act like they care more about the civil rights of terrorists than about defeating them.

    Sadly, the left doesn’t want to win — the war against Islamism or, apparently, national elections. The left wants to be against this mediocre president, whom it cannot beat because he will never run again. And instead of talking sensibly about national security and foreign policy, leftists goofballs like you froth at the mouth with what you believe to be some kind of logical steel traps, but which are really the kinds of ass-clown rhetorical devices used by losers in eighth-grade speech and debate contests.

    And you lose election after election after election. It must suck.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  129. Ray says:

    Most people fail to realize that, in the WOT, it doesn’t matter of Bin Laden is alive or not. Bin Laden is not the de facto commander of every terrorist organization and his death will not stop terrorism from occurring. Bin Laden s nothing more than a figurehead to most of the terrorists and actually has very little control over terrorist organizations in the world. As a matter of fact, each terrorist organization is independent of each other and have their own commanders and are only loosely associated with one another.

    Terrorists existed before Bin Laden, and will exits even after he is dead. Everyone needs to remember that Al Qaeda is not the only terrorist origination that has attacked Americans. Remember, we’re fighting a war on terror, not just on Bin Laden.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  130. anjin-san says:

    Machos,

    Your blather about “Democrats caring more about civil rights for terrorists”, is, well, blather. Given Bush’s miserable job performance, I suppose I can see why utter nonsense like this is all you have. I mean, Republicans are avoiding Bush like he had the plague.

    Perhaps Bush is doing his best. If that is the case, the problem is that his best is very, very poor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  131. anjin-san says:

    Ray,

    That’s sort of like telling a man who’s family has just been murdered “we don’t really need to catch the guy who did it. There have always been murderers, and there will still be murders even if we catch the guy”.

    Sorry pal, I still want justice for the 9-11 victims and their families. I can’t fathom why the right does not.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  132. Hellblazer says:

    James Joyner does his best stupid impression…

    As the saying goes, “ignorance is a condition, stupidity is a strategy”. Yes, 9/11 is all about unity. I guess we’re really lucky Rove isn’t a blogger. We’re just damn fortunate he’s simply the chief strategist of the Republican party……

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  133. Ray says:

    “They wish to permanently change the essential formula of our American democracy.”

    There is no such thing as permanence in a dynamic democracy as exists in America. For proof, look at the Constitution and all the amendments that have been added, removed, and changed over the years. Look at the law that have been enacted, and the laws that have been ruled unconstitutional and are overturned. Look at all the past laws that have been been overturned by acts of Congress over the years. Look at all the administrations that have existed and how the policies change according to the needs of those administrations. Administrations change, Congresses change, voters change, laws change, even the Constitution itself changes. This is a dynamic system and noting is permanent.

    Our system of government is built on the premise that no law is an absolute that will not change over time. That’s why the government is formed the way it is, to respond to a changing world and react appropriately. Government policies will change, laws will evolved, and the country will survive, that’s the beauty of our form of government and is it’s greatest strength.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  134. Ray says:

    “Ray,

    That’s sort of like telling a man who’s family has just been murdered “we don’t really need to catch the guy who did it. There have always been murderers, and there will still be murders even if we catch the guy”.”

    I never said that we don’t need to capture Bin Laden. I said that capturing or killing him will have little or no effect on the WOT. Don’t confuse the point.

    You seem to have a simple view point on life. Even tho we can catch a murderer, like a member of the MS13 gang that was part of a drive by shooting, murders will still be committed by an origination that doesn’t respect the rights of others. You can take out one or two members of a gang, say, yet the gang still survives. Do you really believe that killing Bin Laden is the sum and total of justice for 9/11?

    Taking out Bin Laden is only a small part of justice. Prevention is another. We need to do everything we can to ensure that other attacks don’t occur in this country and so far we have been successful.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  135. Ray says:

    “I can’t fathom why the right does not.”

    You can’t fathom it because you know it’s not true. The ‘right”, as you put it, is behind the WOT and the invasion of Afghanistan that toppled the Taliban and disorganized Al Qaeda. The “right’ understands that this is more than just revenge for 9/11. The ‘right’ knows that we need to stop these attacked before they happen. Justice is more than just revenge.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  136. anjin-san says:

    Ray,

    Your reasoning is seriously flawed dude. Prevention has nothing to do with justice for 9-11. Its a separate issue. Bush’s supporters have tried to minimize his (OBL) importance for the simple reason that Bush could not deliver on his promise of “dead or alive”.

    How do you feel about the fact that Bush claimed to have “destroyed” the Taliban a few years ago when that is obviously not the case?

    As for preventing more attacks, we have seen how airport security was recently thrown into chaos, 5 years after 9-11 and airport security is at pre 9-11 levels.

    We all saw the bang up job done by homeland security during/after Katrina. Did not make me feel very safe.

    Bin Laden thinks big. After 9-11 he would need to have a very big, very successful attack on this country to move his cause forward. He has shown that he can be very patient. Don’t get cocky about our lack of attacks since 9-11.

    EVERYONE in America wants to prevent further attacks on our country. I am just upset that we are focus on Iraq instead of the real problem.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  137. Joyner… show me a post from the LEFT… all I saw were moderate left-of-centers, to be real.

    Of course, you’re just a right-wing hack doing your own bit of propagandistic exploitation, so you don’t care about the fact that people just a few degrees left of center clearly see what others saw five years ago… the politicization of foreign affairs by the worst president ever.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  138. ither says:

    Bush is as bad as Hitler, maybe worse.

    Bush isn’t Hitler. Caligula would be a better analogy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  139. WJA says:

    > John Woo, one of the chief Justice Dept. lawyers
    > in the days after 9/11, respsonsible for so much
    > of the creeping authoritarianism

    John *Yoo* is the one associated with creeping authoritarianism. John *Woo* is associated with creeping Triad gunmen– gunmen that Chow Yun-fat blows away with two Barrettas as he dives sideways in slow motion over the tea house table.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  140. Althor says:

    Reflections upon Seeing the Conclusion of the second and final part of the fabulous ABC mini-series “The Path to 9/11″ so very apropos to this day:

    However “dramatized” and “compressed” the narrative of these events may have been in the mini-series, the portrayal of the elitist, patronizing, disdaining attitude of the “Clintonista” bureaucrats, from Ambassadors, to White House Advisors, to CIA Directors – delighting in their “petty” bureaucratic minutiae, their arrogant penchant for pedantic “legalities,” and for insignificant, frivolous “ideological abstractions” – smacks as being very accurate indeed! It is the same abhorrent, “politically correct,” attitude, and pre-9/11 mentality of today’s Democrats!!!

    Even with all the “censoring” and the “editing” done to it, imposed by the considerable political pressure brought to bear by ex-President Clinton, Senator Harry Reid, and all the outraged Democrats in the Senate, this masterful, heart-wrenching rendering of the events leading to 9/11, is a glaring indictment of the criminal negligence of President Clinton, and those who comprised his Administration, and of their dereliction of duty – while wasting their time on covering up for Clinton’s infidelities, and for perjuring himself before the American people, and indeed the world, concerning the nefarious Lewinski affair! No wonder they wanted the mini-series banned!!!

    I only wish every American would have watched this program, that it may have opened their eyes as to what kind of government a “Democratic” majority in the House and the Senate will mean to this nation come November: “A return to the pre-9/ 11 fallacies of the Democrats and the Clinton Administration!” That is what it would bring!

    And after the “Democratic” majority in our Capitol wins, does away with the Patriot Act, dismantles the NSA Phone Surveillance Program, closes Guantanamo and frees the inmates, suspends all CIA overseas interrogations, and withdraws from Iraq – surrendering it to the extremists much as we surrendered South Viet Nam, Laos, and Cambodia to the Viet Cong and the “Killing Fields,” most likely, tagging along in its wake …there’ll be another 9/11…except this time only worse!!!

    Wake up America, don’t let the Democrats throw away our lives, again!!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  141. Wizbang says:

    Not Even For One Day…

    Yesterday Wizbang’s content was dedicated entirely to commemorating the five year anniversary of the September 11 attacks, both paying tribute to those lost and honoring those who acted so heroically in response to the the unprecedented challenges fac…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  142. chemjeff says:

    Tano,
    I’ve read your comments here with hope, as it plainly shows that not every leftie in 2006 is a conspiracy-minded nutjob. I think you have a lot of good things to say, but on this point I think you’re wrong:

    “Nonetheless, whatever opposition there was, came from the left. And it seemed to me that whatever critical thinking there was, even if it led to hopeful assent, was also coming exclusivly from the left. And I think that speaks very badly of the performance of the right.”

    The President and his advisors HAVE changed their minds on Iraq and on the GWOT in general. One need only look at the military tribunal issue as evidence. Now it’s as if Bush is welcoming the opportunity to try terrorists in American courts when that certainly wasn’t the case just a few years ago. And there have been countless conservative pundits calling Bush to the carpet on this issue or that. (George Will anyone? Check out this story.) Believe me, there’s been plenty of sober reflection on Iraq from the right. Bush has changed his mind, he just hasn’t broadcast to the world “attention: I am now changing my mind”.

    Before you cement your judgment that the righties are all a bunch of “yes-men”, you have to understand the power dynamics involved. Bush IS the guy in charge. He has the obligation to at least appear to be the resolute leader. He can’t be changing his mind every ten seconds and still maintain that image. Democrats, however, are not the ones in charge, and do not have any such obligation. They can say any irresponsible thing they wish and the penalties for doing so are markedly fewer. We saw almost a complete reversal of this during the 1990′s, when it was Clinton bearing the image of presidentiality and some fringe Republicans promoting wild conspiracy theories about Clinton’s supposed drug-running in Arkansas. Just think of this: Remember the Kosovo War? Clinton famously predicted that the peace-keeping troops would be home in a year. Republicans claimed his prediction would turn out to be false, and guess what, it was! The troops are still there! Somewhere along the way Clinton obviously admitted his mistake and changed his mind, but he didn’t declare to the world “today I am changing my mind”. Good leaders don’t do that. They are able to change their mind while still maintaining that image of calm and steady leadership.

    -Chemjeff

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  143. Soccer Dad says:

    9/11 roundup…

    Notable posts on 9/11. A number of my regular reads participated in the 2996 project. Ocean Guy remembers a navy buddy Captain Gerald Deconto. Crossing the Rubicon honors Christine Barbuto. The Muqata honors Nancy Morgenstern. West Bank Mama honors Joh…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  144. Michael says:

    the politicization of foreign affairs by the worst president ever.

    Every time a Lefty says, “worst president ever”, Jimmy Carter’s pager goes off.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  145. LJD says:

    …and the chorus chimes in, bringing the message that they support this lunacy…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  146. [...] The Left Remembers 9/11 [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  147. Daily News For September 12, 2006…

    Foreign Gulbuddin Hekmatyar Reported Captured (This Is Big!) Blasts Heard At Foreign Embassies In Syria Hamas Agrees To Share Power……

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  148. How the left remembered…

    James Joyner waded through the blame-Bush swamps yesterday. Reader Peege writes about a non-9/11 9/11 musical celebration in Atlanta, which included: – “From a Distance,” which features the line “From a distance you look like my friend / even though…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  149. Bandit says:

    As I remember from reading the post the point was that the left’s issues with 9/11 revolve around Bush and not the terrorist murderers. All it took was the 50 comments from the terror cheerleaders to prove it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  150. The War on Terror Log Roll…

    Mr. Drum intimates that the Democrats’ position on the War on Terror depends on whether they can wring concessions on unrelated issues, as if national security were just another log to roll on Washington’s political river….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  151. Pug says:

    Actually, there is very little chaos in Iraq

    How to achieve zero credibility instantly.

    Yes, Althor, let’s all base our beliefs on a false “docudrama”. One with fabricated scenes casting people we don’t like in a bad light. Solid critical thinking there, yes sir. Personally, I prefer to form opinions based on Survivor or Big Brother.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  152. [...] Outside the Beltway — takes a look at how the left remembers 9/11. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  153. [...] By the way, want to see how the nutroots remembered 9-11 yesterday? James Joyner recaps. Hint: You won’t be surprised. Greg Tinti snagged a screencap of how the Daily Kos blog remembered 9-11 before they changed it. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  154. [...] Tue Sep 12, 2006 Is this comment how the Left views 9/11? It sure seems that way [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  155. The ACLU Pays its “Respects” to 9/11…

    Mentions of the nearly three thousand that died on 9/11? No!

    Notation on the WTC collapse? No!

    The Pentagon attack? No!

    Flight 93 and the brave souls that died trying to save thousands of others? No!

    Nothing but unadulterated bashing of Pres…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  156. [...] Update: While perusing the other half of the blogosphere I noticed that Outside the Beltway felt that the left were insufficiently respectful of Republicans yesterday: “Still, the stridency of these posts, even from bloggers and publications on the moderate side of the lefty blogosphere is surprising.”   [link] [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  157. Ray says:

    anjin-san,

    Do you actually believe that capturing Bin Laden is not a goal of the Bush administration? Get real! We have thousands of people looking for Bin Laden right now, including the military and others. America is not alone in the search for Bin Laden, several countries are as well. Just because Bin Laden hasn’t been found doesn’t mean that he won’t be found. The world is a big place and he has lots of supporters that help him elude capture but time is NOT on his side.

    BTW, what, exactly, would you do differently to capture Bin Laden? Do you have some suggestions as to how to handle the WOT, or are you just venting your frustration over the fact that President Bush is in office? What would you and the left do differently than what is being done today? Is the response to 9/11 nothing more than a search for bin Laden and Al Qaeda for you? Was 9/11 nothing more than a criminal act?

    Do you really believe that justice doesn’t include prevention? Then why, pray tell, does Congress and state legislatures enact laws every year that assist in the prevention of crimes, most of which have been in response to a particular a crime that has already occurred? A good example is the Brady bill. That bill was submitted in response the the attack on President Reagan and was supported by the FAMILY of Mr. Brady in the hopes that others will not suffer the same fate as he! Prevention is not a part of justice? That’s news to me!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  158. Iowa Voice says:

    Bush Addresses The Nation…

    I really have no comment on the speech, except to say what I’ve said in the past: Say what you want about Clinton, the man could give a speech. Bush, on the other hand…not so much. He always sounds like he’s just droning on, like he could care le…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  159. Ray says:

    Pug,

    Would you care to back up your statement with a little evidence as to the wide spread chaos in Iraq? Most of the news reports that I have seen shows the attacked to be limited to several cities and not to the country as a whole. Also, tell me why, if chaos is so wide spread, the causality (that’s both dead and wounded) count for Americans is so low? Face it, the chaos isn’t as wide spread as you, and the media, would have us believe.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  160. [...] James Joyner at Outside The Beltway has a collection of links from the Left Blogosphere on how 9/11 was remembered. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  161. Anderson says:

    Now it’s as if Bush is welcoming the opportunity to try terrorists in American courts when that certainly wasn’t the case just a few years ago.

    Provided it’s in kangaroo tribunals where the accused don’t even get to see the evidence against them; and that only after being forced into it by the Supreme Court.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  162. F15C says:

    “Americans are puzzled over why so many people in the world hate us.”

    Not at all. Most of the political elite in the world have hated the US since well before most of us were born. 9/11 did not change that dynamic.

    There was little if any new-found good-will after 9/11 amongst the hate-America/blame-America factions. There was only temporary pretense and show so as not to look too inhuman. Predictably, that faded fast both outside and inside the US.

    While those Palestinian women at least had the guts to dance in the open and on film about 9/11, all too many in the West were dancing in their hearts and behind closed doors.

    No, what puzzles thinking Americans is why so many people hate us *more* than they hate murderous Islamic radicals.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  163. Althor says:

    Quote: Yes, Althor, let’s all base our beliefs on a false “docudrama”. One with fabricated scenes casting people we don’t like in a bad light. Solid critical thinking there, yes sir. Personally, I prefer to form opinions based on Survivor or Big Brother.

    Posted by: Pug at September 12, 2006 09:28

    My friend, if you read my commentary carefully, you’ll see that I wasn’t speaking of particular incidents, or quoting anything said by the characters in the docu-drama. What I am saying is that the attitude of the “Clintonista” bureaucrats smacks as being very accurate indeed!

    Why? Well because it is the same abhorrent, elitist, condescending attitude that the Democrats have today, particularly in the Senate.

    I mean for God’s sake, how can we possibly be even debating wether the NSA should not be listening in on conversations of known terrorist suspects from overseas to America, and make all the big stink and all the hooplah the Democrats have made about it, because of some “legal technicality” about FISA courts, when the lives of thousands may hang on the outcome of our acting on it?!?! Or Harry Reid gloating about how the Democrats had “killed the Patriot Act”?!?!

    Their actions speak louder than words! It would seem the Democrats are far more concerned about the rights of the terrorists, than in saving the lives of those whom they intend to kill:…us!!!

    Insofar as to their “attitudes” the ABC docu-drama was very accurate indeed concerning the arrogant, “do-nothing,” Clintonistas!!!

    Althor

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  164. anjin-san says:

    Ray,

    You are seriously quoting the Brady bill to me after Bush has worked so hard to flush it? Day is night, black is white….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  165. tommy says:

    Tano,

    The left did not criticize Bush Sr. for not taking out Saddam. To the contrary, most on the left agreed with Bush Sr. that the alliance that he had constructed was built on the agreement that we would expel Saddam from the soverign country that he had invaded, period.

    Well, then I guess you better explain all of that to the leftists who are saying “we were better off with Saddam.”

    Nonetheless, whatever opposition there was, came from the left. And it seemed to me that whatever critical thinking there was, even if it led to hopeful assent, was also coming exclusivly from the left. And I think that speaks very badly of the performance of the right.

    Please. I can point you in the direction of Steve Sailer, Buchanan, and a horde of other paleocons who, like myself, didn’t support this war.

    I think your solution for Iraq is not well thought out. Take out Saddam and leave chaos in our wake.

    But I thought you just said the Democrats agreed that Saddam needed to be gotten rid of. What was the United States going to do? Abolish sanctions? Those same sanctions that were continuously lampooned by many people on the left for their effects on Iraqi civilians? Leave them in place? What was the left’s long-term plan for dealing with Saddam?

    I think your solution for Iraq is not well thought out.

    Oh yes! Moving quickly to accomplish peacefully exactly what the Iraqis will accomplish with civil war instead wasn’t a good idea at all.

    Making hard decisions and sticking to them is an admirable quality, when the hard decisions that you have made are the correct ones. When they are bad decisions, then sticking with them leads one over the cliff.

    The left cannot even admit when it has made the bad decisions. The left pretends they never made any bad decisions when those decisions are unpopular. If you believe the average left-winger, the left never supported the war at all. I’ll give Bush credit for sticking to his decisions, even when it wasn’t the most popular thing to do. Simiarly, I give those leftists who always opposed the war credit for sticking to their decisions even when they weren’t popular. Mainstream Democratic politicians were rarely among that former group.

    anjin-san,

    I keep seeing “Bin Laden is dead/probably dead” popping up in arguments made by Bush supporters.

    Very few on the right believes bin Laden is most likely dead. Most believe he is probably in northern Waziristan, where he is beyond our grasp. I have seen some leftists who believe he is hanging out at the Crawford Ranch in Texas or at an undisclosed location with Dick Cheney. I also have seen some leftists who believe that sticking more troops in Afghanistan will somehow allow us to catch bin Laden even though he is probably in Pakistan.

    Tano again,

    “We are used to a peacetime system in which Congress enacts the laws, the president enforces them, and the courts interpret them. In wartime, the gravity shifts to the executive branch.”

    That was true for Abe Lincoln during the Civil War and for FDR during World War II. That is true of practically any war. Abe Lincoln and FDR both employed tactics that were far more authoritarian than anything Bush has ever proposed, let alone gotten.

    anjin-san again,

    Given Bush’s miserable job performance

    We haven’t seen a single al-Qaeda operation on American soil since 9/11. Under Clinton we watched as al-Qaeda went from attacking our overseas embassies, to attacking our military interests, to attacking our nation directly. All this while Osama was safe and snug in Afghanistan. All while al-Qaeda openly operated training camps in the country. All while the Clinton administration did practically nothing. Lawyers in the Clinton administration fretted over what kind of tape they could safely and comfortably apply to bin Laden in the event he was captured. They even demanded that a special chair be developed for bin Laden’s comfort in the event he was captured. That was the kind of leadership we had under Clinton.

    BTW, what, exactly, would you do differently to capture Bin Laden? Do you have some suggestions as to how to handle the WOT,

    That is what I keep asking the Democrats. They whine “we still haven’t caught bin Laden!” I have to ask “what would you do about it? Are you going to invade northwestern Pakistan in an attempt to get him?”

    The Democrats don’t seem to have any strategy at all.

    To address this quote:

    “Americans are puzzled over why so many people in the world hate us.”

    I think everyone needs to read the following article. It should make it clear that the jihadists have hated us for a very long time. They hated us even when the US was a country of little international significance and perhaps provide an answer to those who are still asking, “why do they hate us?”

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=22314

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  166. Ray says:

    anjin-san,

    Yes, I used the Brady bill as one example and your response in no way invalidates my argument. In fact, it strengthens it! Thank you for proving my point!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  167. Lug says:

    WOW! My first time here and I see Leftards are here also!
    Yep! You leftards have convinced me! I’m not voting for Bush in 2008!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  168. [...] Third, James Joyner rounds up 9-11 posts from a bunch of leftwing bloggers, pundits and coot Andy Rooney–all of whom identify the enemy within and minimize the evil of the actual perpetrators of 9-11. Or say we had it coming, which minimizes al Qaeda’s evil too. Or fly the bird at President Bush. The only thing we actually learn from any of them is that Kos’ birthday is in fact September 11. Bummer for him. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  169. WJA says:

    “Bush hasn’t captured Bin Laden yet” is the essential unserious criticism. Does the liberal left *really* want to get behind the administration on doing that, and support what it takes do so?

    OK, let’s see what that’ll require, at minimum:

    1 – Substantial boots on the ground of coalition forces in the Pakistani tribal areas (which Pakistan’s own army recently retreated from, having suffered troop losses by the hundreds) where bin Laden is surely hiding. (If he’s still alive.)
    2 – Shoring up Musharraf’s authoritarian regime, due to inevitable Islamist uprisings and coup attempts 1) will cause.
    3 – Creating yet *another* front in the war against Al Qaeda.
    4 – Creating yet another magnet for Al Qaeda recruitment and jihad– perhaps the most dangerous, as the Pakistani tribal region is accessible by Islamists in Afghanistan, the disputed Kashmiri region, *and* the hardcore Islamists in the former Soviet Union, including Chechenya.
    5 – Holding back India from entering this fray, or using it as a rationale for pushing into Kashmir, and preventing any counter-attack from Pakistan. Oh yeah, India and Pakistan have nukes, so you know, the consequences for blowing this is are extreme.

    So, which person who criticizes Bush for not getting Bin Laden yet wants to sign up for this plan? Anyone?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  170. anjin-san says:

    WJA,

    Guess gettin Bin Laden is just too tough for fightin’ George. Funny, because he keeps on saying our very future & survial are on the line. If thats the case he is not fighting all that hard.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  171. Jim says:

    Huh. Only “Leftards” wanted to capture bin Laden? I seem to rebember some village idiot babbling about gittin’ ‘im dead or alive, we was gonna smoke ‘im out.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  172. Republican malaise: Is Bush losing hold of his party on “the struggle between tyranny and freedom”?…

    Yesterday, while I was guest blogging at The Carpetbagger Report, a commenter asked about conservative reaction to Bush’s 9/11/06 address. He wondered if Bush’s “guaranteeing ……

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  173. Richie says:

    Guess gettin Bin Laden is just too tough for fightin’ George. Funny, because he keeps on saying our very future & survial are on the line. If thats the case he is not fighting all that hard.

    So you really think that our survival depends on capturing Bin-Laden? That’s the “magic bullet? If that’s the case, you are not thinking all that hard.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  174. tommy says:

    Huh. Only “Leftards” wanted to capture bin Laden? I seem to rebember some village idiot babbling about gittin’ ‘im dead or alive, we was gonna smoke ‘im out.

    Certainly beats the Clinton Administration’s bin Laden policy: “Lets not get him at all.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  175. Jim says:

    Certainly beats the Clinton Administration’s bin Laden policy: “Lets not get him at all.”

    Posted by: tommy

    Ah, ya see Tommy. That’s why we didn’t want Disney airing that mockumentary, no matter how hard Gov Jeb Bush (R-Disneyworld) was leaning on them to do so. It just confused you folks who looked at that official 9/11 Report and said “Ah, that’s got too many big words. I’ll just get another Clancy and wait for the movie.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  176. tommy says:

    Ah, ya see Tommy. That’s why we didn’t want Disney airing that mockumentary, no matter how hard Gov Jeb Bush (R-Disneyworld) was leaning on them to do so. It just confused you folks who looked at that official 9/11 Report and said “Ah, that’s got too many big words. I’ll just get another Clancy and wait for the movie.”

    That is all you have in the way of rebuttal, Jim? The same tired ad hominem attacks claiming that the right-wing is stupid/redneck/illiterate/white trash? Weak. Sometimes I think you leftists take recycling a little too far. How about some new rhetoric?

    By the way, Mr. Super Intelligent Liberal, “that’s” is a contraction meaning “that is” not “that has.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  177. [...] The Left Remembers 9/11Outside Beltway – So legitimate discussion over policy and response is now considered traitorous then I guess the terrorists have won because Karl this quote from Mark Steyn on National Review Online is about as disgusting as it gets, and evidences the Right [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0