YoungJRNY wrote:"Had the US been attacked on 9/11, under an Al Gore presidency, there would have been a military response....it might not have been the same type of response.."
Right...the difference? Maintaining a response...to the right country that issued the attack! Not send over soldiers that under-number my G.I Joe collection, completely ignore that issue while at the same time declare war on another country for a reason that turned out to be false!
Progs, I'm disappointed in you that an Ohioan or whichever you would like to be called, like you will look forward to at least 4 more years under a Republican Party..a place where blue-color was once high in profile and proud of their doings. An Obama election would benefit a place like Ohio. Then again, Ohio was the deciding factor of last elections turnout, so I'm not surprised that people of that caliber would vote another Repub. in the house.
I currently have a guy.. a young guy..2 years older than me working on my bathroom and fixing it up. He's voting for McCain. The reason? For abortion reasons. What a joke.
Hopefully this election is done by atleast 11 tomorrow and they close up shop in a landslide.
First...learn to use the quote button. I would prefer that my statement not be misinterpreted as yours. Second, my statement was not an invitation for someone to purport to know what Al Gore would have or wouldn't have done....other than to suggest that there *would* be a military response to 9/11.
Hope that clarifies things....