Quote: But doesn't the lack of attacks point toward successful defense against terror?

If you follow that logic, I must assume that you hold the belief that Clinton sustained a successful defense in preventing terrorist attacks within the U.S. since none occurred after the Feb 26, 1993 attack on the WTC. That attack occurred one month and a few days after he was sworn in as President - on his watch, but not his fault. After that attack, no Al-Queida related attacks occurred within the U.S. until almost 8 months after George Bush took office.

Now I am not one to claim that Clinton did anything extraordinary in terms of national security, nor am I one to presume that Bush must be doing something right since we haven't been attacked since 9/11/01. I merely cite that if you are under the belief that Bush has implemented a successful defense strategy because of the lack of Al-Queida attacks within the U.S., then one can only assume that you would credit the Clinton administration for the same accomplishments over 8 years. I personally find it disingenuous when Bush supporters use this claim to bolster anti-American legislation such as the Patriot Act, and other neo-con agendas.

__________________
Capitalism is like an island of wealth, surrounded by a sea of poverty.