Well, if believing that it’s just as wrong to kill babies in Iraq as it is to kill them here, makes me a nutjob, that’s fine.
I’m good with what I see inside me, and I can’t even wrap my mind around the kind of thought process it must take to believe that it’s ok to murder thousands of children because “they’re over there”. And so the person responsible for their deaths is “less of a monster” than Bin Laden. IN fact, he’s not a monster at all. He’s kind of like a funny uncle. HE just bumbled his way into murdering thousands of kids. He didn’t mean to do it.
To me? That’s not only morally depraved, it’s totally retarded. Of course he meant to do it.
And of course, there isn’t a Republican alive who wouldn’t be foaming with rage and screaming “traitor!” if Al Gore or Bill Clinton had been President on 9/11 and seven years later they didn’t get bin laden. And only the dishonest ones won’t own that.
But I’m not foaming at the mouth. Rather, it made me rethink some things. And I asked, “Why haven’t we been able to get Bin Laden?” And always, the question was greeted with a roaring silence.
PS- I'm fairly certain that RS believes that 9/11 was not how it's presented. You have called him these names, right? Right? Cause I must have missed that?