13 October 2004

Bush -vs- Kerry

Wrong War, Wrong Time, Wrong Place...

There has been much criticism of Kerry's ability to manage our ...uhhhh.....situation in Iraq with a "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" mentality. A friend of mine (a Kerry supporter as well) argued two things (1) that some of Kerry's statements could be read as a lack of support for our troops and (2) that you can't say to our allies - "this is all wrong, but come join us in our mistake". I wholly feel that this is a real misinterpretation of Kerry's statements. First, we can be honest with our troops. That is far better than sending them a message of "we love you but stick it out because the President's agenda and ego are more important than the sacrifices you are making". Second, when Kerry is put in office, he will be handed this mess. He has no choice but to deal with it. The difference is Bush will push "more of the same" and Kerry will execute a plan to finish what must be done there and end this occupation of Iraq. He will not be asking potential allies to help perpetuate this travesty. He will seek and be given support in cleaning up the mess made by this administration.

Accusing Kerry Of Being A Flip-Flopper

This is enough to make a very reasonable woman just nuts. I am so tired of hearing this Flip-Flop story. Someone throws a soundbyte out there and "they" marry themselves to it. I don't even think I could describe how dangerous it is to find your one spot, get comfortable with all the orchestrated answers and never re-visit the issue again. What would you call holding a staunch position so desperately that you are no longer able to see it clearly? I might call that being a myopic zealot.What would you call continually reviewing your position, always checking yourself, realizing that perceived reality does indeed change. How about being willing to change your course when you see a better path. I might call that productive or better still...effective.

W.......changing your mind is NOT a character flaw. You should give a try sometime.

They Divided - Let's Conquer

For me, some very interesting aspects of the Bush-Cheney team came to the surface in the VP debate. Usually the president is the one in control of the facts and knows the agenda. After last night, it is evident - who really understands the facts. The neocons who tend to be libertarian and non-secular will see Bush as the cardboard cutout figure he is. Cheney has been speaking while Bush moves his lips. However, Cheney may be reaching his limit. There were things in his remarks that displayed a disdain for the weight he has shouldered (the puppet's screw ups). On several issues he just looked like he could no longer blindly go along with the Bush'ese rhetoric. I believe that dynamic exists throughout the party. Neocons, moderates, Corporate Christian Coalition, and fiscal conservatives are being divided on pretty heated issues. And VP Cheney (albeit reluctantly) led the charge on that divisiveness. Suddenly the Republican party does not appear as monolithic. There are now wedge issues available for Kerry to appeal to.

Definition: Radical Agenda

Define Radical Agenda In Two Easy Steps (I reserve the right to add more critical steps as they are exercised)

1. Pre-emptive actions that systematically fit into a political agenda and have no factual justification.

2. Relying on, appealing to and fostering a voter base who need only be uninformed (America was ripe for a hostile take-over by a radical administration)

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Excellent, love it! »