Jacob Weisberg's "Should We Blame Clinton?" pressed the button with Fray readers—even by "Ballot Box" standards the number of postings was high. Also up there, and even more controversial, was David Plotz's "Life's Odds and Sept. 11."

Subject: Recalculating the Blame

Re: "Ballot Box: Should We Blame Clinton?"

From: Thrasymachus

Date: Fri Oct 12  8:19 a.m. PT

It is in the nature of successful terrorist attacks that they are always foreseeable and never foreseen. Terrorists rely on the fact that their actions are unexpected. … It is therefore always possible, after the fact, to devise a strategy that could have averted any terrorist strike; and the government, bearing responsibility for the welfare of all its people, can always be blamed. Thus, the mere fact that a terrorist attack occurred when it could have been prevented is not a complete case for government neglect. A fair evaluation of the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush II's defenses against terrorism would have to include the number of terrorist attacks that were successfully thwarted, the number of unsuccessful attempts that were made.

[Find this post here.]

Subject: When To Mourn



Re: "Life's Odds and Sept. 11"



From: locdog



Date: Wed Oct 10  8:19 a.m. PT

Part of the dilemma that David Plotz faces is largely a by-product of the great American sentimentalism that was so prevalent when, say, Princess Diana died. People … [were] weeping and moaning as if a meaningful part of their immediate lives, like a close friend or beloved pet, had suddenly been removed. Irrational would be an understatement. … Doesn't it seem like maybe we are a culture that has placed such great import on our silly, impulsive feelings and not enough on our iron wills?

[Find this post here.]

Subject: Winning the Talk



Re: "Frame Game: Terror Unanswered"



From: Yukon



Date: Wed Oct 10  5:45 p.m. PT

It avails us comparatively little to kill Bin Laden and others if all it proves to the rest of the world is what they already knew: that Americans can bomb better than anybody else. The Union victory in the Civil War, the Allied victory in World War II, didn't just prove who was stronger. They proved, for most people, who was right. … Bush's supporters sneer at the notion that presidential leadership is "performance art." That would be news to political leaders from King David to Bill Clinton, who easily grasped that a leader's public persona is the one tool which is really under his complete control. …

[Find this post here.]