By contrast, George W. Bush presides over an administration which ignored repeated, specific warnings about impending terrorist attacks - at the very least, criminal negligence which allowed 19 men with boxcutters (we are told) to defeat the entire defense apparatus of the United States, and murder over 3,000 innocent Americans.

Does that further an image of the US as strong?

And of course Pres. Bush acted in such a strong and decisive manner at the moment of crisis that dark day by resolutely staying at his post in a grade school reading room.

Clinton lied about a blowjob; Bush has lied about his initial knowldege of the WTC attacks, among other things.

In the first case, there is a fib about a tawdry affair that was really nobody's business, and affected the nation not one whit, while in the second, we have heard an obviously phony claim directly related to the course of events on what is arguably the darkest day in our nation's history.

Clinton's administration may have had its shortcomings, but jobs were plentiful, the budget was balanced, the president was widely admired around the world - witness the delirious crowds in Ireland - and most of us felt good about being Americans. By contrast, George W. Bush has allowed a devastating attack on American soil by terrorists, and used this horrific event to justify a campaign of bloody foreign adventures abroad, and a laundry list of repressive measures at home.

Under Pres. Bush's leadership, America's prestige has fallen to an all-time low around the world, and many Americans are not feeling very good about their country these days.

S