(Original Post Deleted by Exceeding the 5,000 Character Limit) Let me go back and re-state that criticizing Bush for the failure of our intelligence functions to capture or kill bin Laden is dumb. I don't think it's ok that he hasn't been captured (as eddie implies or accuses) I just don't think it's something that a President should be held accountable for.

Nor am I ok (not upset) that he hasn't yet been captured, as Mag implies. That is a sad failure on the part of the CIA. Nor do I believe that by invading Iraq and deposing Saddam did we "take our eye off the ball" and let bin Laden get away because we had depleted our troop concentration in Afghanistan. We could have our entire infantry, along with all the soldiers of all the European countries and Russia (the Russians were familiar with the terrain), and we would not have found him. To think that infantrymen would find this snake sounds really dumb to me, he will be found through an effective network of spooks, which we did not have in Afghanistan (or nearly anywhere else in the world) at the end of the Clinton Administration. I don't blame Clinton, that is just a reality.

What Bush did do effectively is to prevent bin Laden from planning and carrying out a follow-up attack on US soil, which I believe he had planned. For that he deserves some credit. The ridiculous stuff that our republican congress has passed and mandated at airports, and the failure to secure our ports and borders, which is a bit unsettling, is really the responsibility of Congress. They have failed miserably here and if the democrats could fashion anything resembling a platform for the mid-term elections, they should pay for it this fall. That will likely not happen and their ridiculous approach to security and wasteful spending will be confirmed by the re-election of the majority of republicans. Why are there no leaders among all of the democrats, only obstructionists?