|
ok -- may get me banned. I hope not. It's a two-glasses-of-wine WTF ???? rant.
Bin Laden: Allegedly tried to kill 50,000.* Killed 3,000.**
Bush: Allegedly determined to "get" Bin Laden -- dead or alive.*** Killed 100,000.****
So -- whose the most effective ... uhm .. killer of innocent people?
Am I supposed to feel ok b/c it's 100,000 Iraqis instead of Americans? Is that supposed to make me want Bush? He can't get the ONE -- but thousands are slaughtered in his (alleged) crusade to get that one.
i'm ... i just don't GET it.
*Per prior tapes/info, they were hoping to kill 50,000 on 9/11. **Killed 3,000 innocent civilians on 9/11 ***After 9/11, blamed Bin Laden and said we would get him. Dead or alive. ****Most recent estimate of innocent Iraqi casualties.
What I'm nost ... sick about tonight is that I'm so afraid that bin Laden's most recent recuiting angle will work. He's played the American people and we, like sheep (NOT we DUers .. but others), will fall in line behind Bush.
And -- just as bin Laden planned -- (a) he will be able to recruit more terrorists to attack us and (b) we will not again have the sympathy of the world because -- they -- like many of us -- will be thinking that we brought it upon ourselves.
I said here - when we first heard about the "ABC tape" -- that the warning was a preemptive, post-election warning. A planned -- you voted him in, now you're gonna pay.
I'm still so scared that that's what's gonna happen.
ok. enuf of my rant. i DO know the answer. Stop my whining and GOTV.
For tonight tho -- i'm just gonna have another glass of wine ...
|