Good question. Especially since Clinton had more to do with the September 11th attacks than Bush did. Consider this:
-The first World Trade Center attack in 1993, which was linked to al Qaeda;
-The Khobar Tower attacks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, also linked to al Qaeda, in which 19 Americans were killed;
-The embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, also linked to al Qaeda;
-The USS Cole attack in 2000, also linked to al Qaeda
These five attacks, to which Clinton initiated virtually no response (with the exception of the cruise missile launch to Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998 in response to the embassy attacks; none of the suspects were killed in those cruise missile attacks, by the way) were all linked to al Qaeda. As much as I dislike Bush, I'm certain he would not have allowed us to be attacked 5 times. In fact, I'll even go as far as to say that if Bush had been president during the first World Trade Center attack, none of the others, and thus, 9/11, would never have happened.