Not all change is good - agreed. But I would argue when you are as disliked as the U.S. currently is, then almost any change is looked at as a positive, at least initially. As I said previously, it will take 6-12 months for the world to determine if we really are any better with whomever is elected.

I think to place 'blame' of 9/11 on Clinton is misplaced. If we were to get hit with another 9/11 type disaster in the next 4-6 years or so, that would mean it was likely planned 2-6 years ago (maybe more or less, but we don't know). To me, the current president - whomever it might me, is accountable for any attack that happens during his/her time in office. Planning is a lot more difficult to prevent than execution. Also, planned attacks can be prevented with the right person and/or policy. We've had many military operations aborted at the last minute after years or months of planning due to last minute changes/decisons made. So regardless when an attack is planned, I believe the person in office is always ultimately responsible for what happens.

Much of the way to judge any leader in the time of disaster is by how they respond to it. God forbid we have such a disaster again, but the responses of our leader(s) will be much more of a measure than anything else. IMO

That is your opinion...and you're entitled to it.

__________________

An unwavering defender of those I see worth protecting.

"promote the general welfare, not provide the general welfare"

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.