|
It's a common and still-powerful argument, but is it actually true? I mean, of course *everything* changed immediately afterwards ... hell, if nothing else we are paying closer attention to what's going on around us, both domestically and abroad. And I dare say you'll never see another commuter plane hijacked again in this country if for no other reason than passengers would no longer allow it. We know the stakes now. Things DID change, and we adapted because that's WHAT WE DO, right? We made personal changes, we allowed for additional risk in life and take precautions against them ... and on the federal level, we re-routed money to deal with this "new" issue, we're watching people at the border a little more closely ... we even sort of kind of tried to get the guy who took my buildings down.
But this is three years out now, and I'm still hearing the same lines from republikans and many democrats who are asking me to accept that not only *did* things change, but that they are *still* in the process of changing. Well, "still in the process of changing"? Isn't that just life? I mean things aren't the same now as they were 10 years ago, with or without 9/11. And here's Miller, Koch, Lieberman, and even my former favourite radio host Phil Hendrie (democrats/liberals all), *still* selling me this line about things changing ...
I mean ... I am NOT worried about this country being invaded and taken over. I *am* however now concerned about outside threats that intend to disrupt our way of living. Miller is telling me that this issue alone is several magnitudes of importance HIGHER than the host of other issues that Mr.Bush and I disagree on, that even Mr.Bush and *Miller* disagree on! That's a pretty big threat we are talking about then! But, I just don't see it as *that* big of a threat (in context, of course). Am I wrong?
And please, it's NOT because I've f-ing forgotten, and Darryl Worley and Hannity and Limbaugh and Matthews and every other douchebag that even TRIES to propose this as the case can all take their pious, self-righteous opinions and pound them. People are simply not programmed to forget life-changing events, but rather to adapt and keep moving. It's like, these guys are cromags asking us to stop eating food for a few decades until we get this 'Dinosaurs can eat us if we leave the cave' problem figured out. And I'm not saying we don't have the right to protect ourselves from this threat; OF COURSE WE DO, as does anyone, and as WOULD anyone be it Ike, JFK, Clinton, Gore, or Jesus H. McGovern.
Anyway, before this gets too long, this is our place to talk, to hash things out, right? So, am I just way off or what? I mean, saying "things changed" is hardly a reason to pursue an un-winnable war, or attempt to make time stand still while we bend over and tie our shoelaces. Aren't we better off forging ahead (part of which is IMO getting rid of Mr.Bush) as humans are wont to do? Or am I just too young to get things?
|