[N8 v2.0]

Best of the Web Today
Wall St Journal | 23 Sep | JAMES TARANTO

Mr. Personality
John Kerry showed up for an interview with NPR yesterday, and Robert Siegel of "All Things Considered" actually managed--though not without considerable struggle--to pin him down on a point regarding Iraq. Here's our transcript (hat tip: blogger H.D. Miller):

Siegel: What do you do if you ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff what they need to achieve their mission in Iraq and they say, "We need a lot more troops"? Do you escalate the troop levels, or do you plan for a quick or a constant exit instead?

Kerry: You have to support our troops, and you have to do what's necessary to try to make this mission successful, but they have not asked for that. I have to wait until I'm president and sit down with them and see where we are.

Siegel: But you yourself have pointed out that Gen. Shinseki, the former Army chief of staff, said there should be hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq, and you say he was fired for saying that. What if you get now the "real story," as you would say, the Army speaking candidly--

Kerry: I'll have to make a decision when I get there as to what the probabilities are. I can't hypothesize as to what I am going to find on Jan. 20--whether I'm going to find a Lebanon or whether I'm going to find a country that's moving towards an election. That depends on what the president does now.

Siegel: But--

Kerry: I think the leadership has been arrogant and disastrous.

Siegel: But should either you or whoever is president next year consider the possibility of an increase in troops? Is that even a consideration, or should it be completely off the table?

Kerry: I do not intend to increase troops. I intend to get the process in place that I described, and I believe as a new president, with new credibility, with a fresh start, that I have the ability to be able to change the dynamics on the ground.​

So finally, after asking the question three times, Siegel gets an answer out of Kerry: "I do not intend to increase troops," even if that's what the generals say is necessary. (Note: This column, like Kerry, takes no position on the appropriate troop strength in Iraq, so please don't vote for us either.) He goes on to imply that it won't be necessary, because simply by being John Kerry, he will "be able to change the dynamics on the ground."

That's right, Kerry expects us to believe he will succeed in Iraq on the sheer power of his personality. Really makes you confident, doesn't it?

Kerry also took the opportunity again to explain his vote in favor of liberating Iraq:

The authority is the authority to do the inspections. The authority is the authority to build an alliance. The authority was necessary because it was the only way to make inspections happen so that you could hold Saddam Hussein accountable. But giving the authority did not start the war. The president started the war. The president made the choice of when to go to war. We also gave him the authority not to go to war.​

By this logic, Ted Kennedy is a war monger, since he voted against giving the president "the authority not to go to war."

 

[N8 v2.0]

(cont...)

Iraq's Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, however, has a different view of what Kerry voted for. In an address to a joint session of Congress today, he said:

Ladies and gentlemen, I particularly want to thank you in the United States Congress for your brave vote in 2002 to authorize American men and women to go to war to liberate my country, because you realized what was at stake. And I want to thank you for your continued commitment last year when you voted to grant Iraq a generous reconstruction and security funding package.​

In fairness to Kerry, we should point out that he voted against that funding package after he voted for it. The Associated Press notes that Kerry--who didn't deign to attend Allawi's speech--weighed in on it almost immediately:

Speaking in Columbus, Ohio, just after the Allawi speech, Kerry said, "The prime minister and the president are here, obviously, to put their best face on the policy. But the fact is that the CIA estimates, the reporting, the ground operations and the troops all tell a different story."

Despite the contention by Allawi and Bush that things are getting better in Iraq, Kerry said, "They're not getting better and we need to change the course to protect our troops and to win."​

Such effrontery! Imagine, some Arab thinking he knows what's going on in his own country! Does Iyad Allawi know who John Kerry is?

'You Have to Support Our Troops'
"Kerry Rallies Troops With Fierce Attack on Bush's Credibility"--headline, Independent (London), Sept. 23

The Road to Surfdom
The Bush campaign has released what is probably the best political ad of the year. It shows footage of John Kerry windsurfing (though not surfing in Vietnam) in rapidly alternating directions, as a narrator reads off various positions he's switched. Johann Strauss's "Blue Danube Waltz" plays in the background. The concluding line is "John Kerry: whichever way the wind blows."

The Kerry campaign shot back with a response ad, which, bizarrely, tries to change the subject to Iraq. Against a backdrop of an American flag (wow, who knew these guys were so patriotic?), ominous music plays as a narrator delivers the message:

One thousand U.S. casualties. Two Americans beheaded just this week. The Pentagon admits terrorists are pouring into Iraq. In the face of the Iraq quagmire, George Bush's answer is to run a juvenile and tasteless attack ad. John Kerry has a plan for success. Get allies involved. Speed up the training of Iraqis. Take essential steps to get a free election next year. On Iraq, it's time for a new direction.​

To be sure, there is a war on, but the scolding tone of this ad strikes us as a bit much. After all, if we're not supposed to be doing anything frivolous while men are dying in Iraq, what the hell was John Kerry doing windsurfing?

The Kerry ad is really just another manifestation of the Democrat's narcissism. The message is: Don't you dare make fun of me in time of war! (On the other hand, we're supposed to believe that badmouthing the commander in chief and the war effort is "patriotic" "dissent.")

Surely, though, if we stop mocking John Kerry, the terrorists will have won.

 

[Toshi]

what's your point? would you know who Iyad Allawi was if he wasn't identified in the article? are you familiar at all with the issues surrounding the u.s.-appointed government's lack of support? or do you simply copy and paste in an electronic form of regurgitation?

 

[MikeD]

Neither side really has much of a plan, and the quasi-'plans' that have been put forth closely resemble one another. That said, the Republicans are a lot better at making people think they have a plan.

 

[fluff]

N8, did you write any of that yourself or is there another idiot out there that you are parroting?

This bit:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be sure, there is a war on, but the scolding tone of this ad strikes us as a bit much. After all, if we're not supposed to be doing anything frivolous while men are dying in Iraq, what the hell was John Kerry doing windsurfing?

The Kerry ad is really just another manifestation of the Democrat's narcissism. The message is: Don't you dare make fun of me in time of war! (On the other hand, we're supposed to believe that badmouthing the commander in chief and the war effort is "patriotic" "dissent.")

Surely, though, if we stop mocking John Kerry, the terrorists will have won.
________________________________________________________________________

is complete juvenile partisan nonsense and the rest is little better.

Attacks on personality rather than policy always makes me feel that the attacker is somewhat bereft of decent ammo about the issues that really matter. Having said that, I do acknowledge that US presidents seem to be elected on personality, charisma, sound bites and looks rather than anything of substance. John Major would never have won an election in the US...

 

[Pedalist]

I just got back from Iraq a few months ago as some of you may know. The sittuation on the ground is getting worse in some ways. The individuals who are fighting the US/Allies, are now getting organized. Used to be that many fighters acted alone. I don't think that President Bush or Mr Kerry have a plan to imediatley remove troops from Iraq. I do beleive that they both have a plan, and I am pretty sure it is not what the general public wants to hear. If you right now today said that all troops are leaving and coming home. It would still take a year maybe more to get everyone out of that part of the world. There is so much equipment, and so many people that we don't have the logistical support for such a mass movement. Another thing is that with the current sittuation being what it is in Iraq. If you remove the United States from the equation you are going to end up with a worse sittuation than before the war. Regardless of who you vote for or who you like. I don't think that the war should be a motivator. I wish that the two of them would show some tact, and quit using the war as a volleyball.

 

[fluff]

I just got back from Iraq a few months ago as some of you may know. The sittuation on the ground is getting worse in some ways. The individuals who are fighting the US/Allies, are now getting organized. Used to be that many fighters acted alone. I don't think that President Bush or Mr Kerry have a plan to imediatley remove troops from Iraq. I do beleive that they both have a plan, and I am pretty sure it is not what the general public wants to hear. If you right now today said that all troops are leaving and coming home. It would still take a year maybe more to get everyone out of that part of the world. There is so much equipment, and so many people that we don't have the logistical support for such a mass movement. Another thing is that with the current sittuation being what it is in Iraq. If you remove the United States from the equation you are going to end up with a worse sittuation than before the war. Regardless of who you vote for or who you like. I don't think that the war should be a motivator. I wish that the two of them would show some tact, and quit using the war as a volleyball.

Indeed. Given the situation that exists today the US (and UK) has a moral responsibility not to pull out too quickly and leave a power vacuum. It requires the correct level of commitment to bring stability and enable free and fair elections, which may well need additional, rather than fewer, troops.

Probably would lose you the election to say so though.

 

[golgiaparatus]

He also said he would do what is necessary, does everything you read go in that brain of yours or is it really that selective?

Kerry basically said that he couldnt accurately answer the question because he is not in a position to know all the specifics, and that is the truth. He said he does not INTEND to increase troops. That does not mean that if he gets in office and sees that more troops are actually what is required that he wont do it.

I stopped reading after your assinine comment, hell, I dont even know why I started in the first place.

 

[N8 v2.0]

He also said he would do what is necessary, does everything you read go in that brain of yours or is it really that selective?

Kerry basically said that he couldnt accurately answer the question because he is not in a position to know all the specifics, and that is the truth. He said he does not INTEND to increase troops. That does not mean that if he gets in office and sees that more troops are actually what is required that he wont do it.

I stopped reading after your assinine comment, hell, I dont even know why I started in the first place.

So what you are saying is that Kerry would do exactly what Pres Bush is doing in Iraq.

Kerry is a weather vane in a tornado.

 

[fluff]

So what you are saying is that Kerry would do exactly what Pres Bush is doing in Iraq.

Kerry is a weather vane in a tornado.

And Bush is a moron in power.