First, if that's what you believe then I think that's a reasonable explanation for why you would vote for Bush. I will point out one error before I proceed to my questions. The main reason given for our attacking Iraq was not the violation of UN resolutions. That was only a minor point in the rhetoric. Also, as I've pointed out before (and please gentlemen you know what I mean by this) Israel violates UN resolutions like we change socks...and even the UN did not buy into the United States sudden interest in UN resolution violations. So I ask that you at least think about that Pat.  

Here are my questions:

1. Where does this idea that terrorists root for a Democrat for president come from? I have never seen, heard, or read anything that supports that idea. I've never seen, heard, or read about any terrorist stating his support for a Democrat. 
 
This has been a myth generated by the Right and it's quite a nasty thing to say because it paints those on the Left as "terrorists" or at the very least aligns them with terrorists. I've never seen a poll taken of terrorists or terrorist organizations to see who they support for the American presidency. Have you? Can anyone produce a terrorist who proclaims he supports John Kerry? I'll let you answer that before I comment further.

Do you honestly think they (a terrorist network) would openly do that? I never stated which party it would be the only question posed was who do you think the terrorist would rather see in office? If you were a terrorist Reg which party would you rather see in office and why?

2. Where does the idea that terrorists "fear" Bush come from? To me this is myth number two that the Right flaunts but can't support.
I think on the whole the sentiment is that the right is hell of a lot more decisive in their support of military than on the left. Would you argue that the Democrats are willing to spend as much on support of defense than the Republicans?

Terrorist activity is at an all time high. They are now more focused than ever before and have generated more anger at the United States than ever before. Bush is not "feared" the world over...he's despised.
Don’t you find it odd Reg that Bush is despised and not the terrorist themselves?
They (the terrorists) make supposed attacks in retaliation to something we do and the press has a field day with Bush not the terrorist. It’s like how dare you piss these people off just look at what they will do! News flash for the world! They are going to do it anyway at some point no matter what we do.

The Gulf Region is a cesspool of terrorist activity now and as stated by many people form both sides terrorists have "poured into Iraq"...which is odd don't you think because that's where we've concentrated our troops. Shouldn't, by your theory, that be the most difficult place for them to operate and feared place for them to be? Yet, they are out of control there. Why?
I think you stated this somewhere in the post. The reason being is to kill American soldiers get headlines further support the idea that we are not making progress over there.

 I think it's fantastic that we've managed to avoid a second terrorist attack here in the US and maybe Bush is to thank for that because he got the terrorists to focus on killing our troops in Iraq instead of Americans here on US soil. Now they don't need to travel as far to kill an American. Plus it's better for them to kill our troops in Iraq because it's better propaganda for them...it shows they can defeat the great American war machine and makes our military look weak. That's an image they want to create. It helps recruit more terrorists. I think the only real thing that we've improved to protect ourselves here in the US is we've made it more difficult for terrorists to travel by plane into our country. Prior to 9/11 it was easy for a terrorist to jump on a plane. That would have happened no matter who was president.
I think my point above this one with what you are stating here

So, is it a miracle we haven't had another attack here in the US? I'd say no. The attacks are usually spaced out by a number of years and they are focusing their efforts elsewhere right now because Bush made it easier for them to do so.
So killing them on their own soil, dissecting them piece by piece, leader by leader, is not going to prevent them from attacking us on our own soil?

Anyone will tell you that with the way our military is focused in Iraq we've dropped the ball in the rest of the world and spent a lot of money creating a war in Iraq that has proved to be the second greatest propaganda tool for terrorists after the video of collapsing towers in New York.
Is that anyone on the left will tell you or anyone in general? That’s saying there are not two sides to this Reg and of course you know there are.

So it seems to me Pat that while I think what you posted is thoughtful it seems based on myths created by the right that can't be supported.  
Not true. You call them myths propagated by the right I call them observations I’ve made over the last 25 years starting with the Iranian hostage crisis.