Quantcast

War on Terror vs. War on the President (Bush vs. Dem's)

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
N8Note:
Ok, it is a sloooow day in the Political Debate Forum so here's something to think about:
War on Terror vs. War on the President
Austin American Statesman | Thursday, February 12, 2004 | James Lileks

Let's just be blunt: The North Koreans would love to see John Kerry win the election. The mullahs of Iran would love it. The Syrian Baathists would sigh with relief. Every enemy of America would take great satisfaction if the electorate rejects the Bush doctrine and scuttles back to hide under the U.N. Security Council's table. It's a hard question, but the right one: Which candidate does our enemy want to lose? George W. Bush.

And some conservatives will be happy to help, it seems.

Woe and gloom have befallen some on the right. Bush has failed to act according to The Reagan Ideal.

The actual President Reagan may have issued an amnesty for illegal immigrants, but the Ideal Reagan would have done no such thing. So unless Bush packs freight cars full of gardeners and dishwashers and dumps them off at the Mexican border, some voters will just sit this one out.

The Ideal Reagan would have eliminated the National Endowment for the Arts; the actual Reagan proposed a $1 million increase in his final budget. But Bush increased NEA funding -- perhaps an attempt to placate people who wouldn't vote for him if he showed up in performance with Karen Finley and a can of Hershey's syrup. So angry conservatives might just sit this one out.

And if a Democrat takes office, and the Michael Moores and Rob Reiners and Martin Sheens crowd the airwaves on Nov. 3 to shout their howls of vindication? If the inevitable renaissance of Iraq happens on Kerry's watch, and the economy truly picks up steam in the first few years before the business cycle and Kerry's tax hikes kick in? If emboldened Islamic terrorists smell blood and strike again? Fine. Maybe the next Republican president will do everything they want.

Oh, sure, Bush is fine on the foreign affairs stuff, and yes, there's a partial-birth abortion law, and the tax cuts were nice, and come to think of it, Sept. 11 wasn't followed by blow after blow after blow, for some reason. The nation endures, at least at press time. But that's hardly enough. Where's that bill requiring 60-foot Ten Commandments monuments in every capitol rotunda? Let Kerry win. Teach the GOP a lesson, it will.

So both sides have elements that seem unserious about the defining issue of the day: the war. But the right's malcontents snipe from humid redoubts of Internet message boards. The left's biggest spokesmen are parading their delusions.

No less than Al Gore has practically accused the president of treason. In a Feb. 8 speech in Tennessee, Gore went on an alarming rant, performed almost in an arr-matey pirate voice. "He betrayed this country!" Gore bellowed. "He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place."

We've been manipulated into a state of fear, Gore shouted. Really. Which administration spent most of 1998 warning us about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, only to launch some missiles and walk away? Gore saw all the intel on WMD. Gore was part of an administration that pushed for regime change because it viewed Saddam, correctly, as a danger to the region and to America. Does Gore think we don't remember everything Democrats said about Saddam and WMD, when they felt responsible for the nation?

As for that state of fear, well, anyone out there feel afraid of Saddam today? Didn't think so.

Gore should give this speech at the convention. Why not? Why not stand up and give vent to all the poisons hatching in the muck? Why not tell America that Bush lied about everything, that he took the country to war for reasons he knew would be discredited, just so Halliburton could make another buck or two? It's what they seem to believe, after all. The delusions of their fringe have become articles of faith for the mainstream. Bush was AWOL! Bush knew! Bush lied! Bush never flosses! Skull and Bones! Plastic turkey!

At least we'll have a clear choice in November. Bush is serious about the war. The Democrats are serious about the war against Bush.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
56,392
22,468
Sleazattle
Originally posted by N8
N8Note:
Ok, it is a sloooow day in the Political Debate Forum so here's something to think about:
N8, just write something yourself. That always gets people fired up and the poli forum starts to go nuts. So just throw something good out there like "Tax the poor heavily so they have less incentive to be lazy"
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Well, responding to the article...Id say that's right. I dont find the Dems to be pro-anything, as much as anti-Bush. I know that's the way of Bi-partisan politics and all, but we're in the middle of something that needs to be followed through. If Kerry vowed to continue steadfast in our current military strategy...Id vote democrat:eek: The economy will fluctuate over time...always. Healthcare, gay marriages, illegals....whatever. Minor issues in my mind. I think Kerry might be a bit better at re-forming some busted relationships from before the war only because he's running 'opposed' to Bush. I dont like either of the candidates particularly, but Bush's views are more closely related to mine.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Originally posted by BurlySurly
Well, responding to the article...Id say that's right. I dont find the Dems to be pro-anything, as much as anti-Bush. I know that's the way of Bi-partisan politics and all, but we're in the middle of something that needs to be followed through. If Kerry vowed to continue steadfast in our current military strategy...Id vote democrat:eek: The economy will fluctuate over time...always. Healthcare, gay marriages, illegals....whatever. Minor issues in my mind. I think Kerry might be a bit better at re-forming some busted relationships from before the war only because he's running 'opposed' to Bush. I dont like either of the candidates particularly, but Bush's views are more closely related to mine.
Aren't they pro- balancing the budget?

And was does being against the current military policy not translate into be pro- an alternative.

You are right, it is the way of bi-partisan politics, most everyone here does it.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Originally posted by fluff


And was does being against the current military policy not translate into be pro- an alternative.
I havent heard a viable altrenative thus far.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
Originally posted by BurlySurly
If Kerry vowed to continue steadfast in our current military strategy...
Strategies change... even Bush/Rumsfield's strategy has shifted.

That being said, Kerry has been pretty explicit that he would maintain a similar troop presence in Iraq, against the far-left's wishes. Admittedly he still plays it as an attack on Bush; something along the lines of (paraphrased): "Now that we're there [and I voted for it:rolleyes:], we have a responsibility to stabilize and rebuild Iraq..." I believe he wants to initiate a much more international effort, but he's not pulling out if that's what you mean.

Or are you talking more broadly? Iran, NK, etc?

edit: also, if you read up on Kerry, he actually has a very developed platform, with firmly defined policies (much more so, IMO, than Edwards). He's "pro" a lot of things. They just don't sift through the media, because CNN is busy picking on Bush and the general public doesn't care. They're more partisan than the partisans.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Originally posted by ohio

...you read up on Kerry, he actually has a very developed platform, with firmly defined policies (much more so, IMO, than Edwards). He's "pro" a lot of things. They just don't sift through the media, because CNN is busy picking on Bush and the general public doesn't care. They're more partisan than the partisans.
He's consistantly Pro-Kerry... anything else is subject to change depending on the political landscape.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Originally posted by ohio

Or are you talking more broadly? Iran, NK, etc?

Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. I just think we've made a stance...and its been effective. Stopping now is a bad idea. Iraq of course needs to be stabilized...but there are other problems out there.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
Look, I'm sure you all know I'd probably be classified as a lefty. Now that I've gotten that out of the way, there is no way in hell the US can disengage from Iraq. If the US pulls out, there will be civil war. The most likely outcome of that is going to be Turkey attacking the Kurds in the north of the country, and an eventual fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iraq.

The only problem is figuring out how to avoid the fundamentalist Islmamic regime there anyways. If I had to guess, I'd say American troops will be in Iraq for at least 10 years.
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
Originally posted by Silver
Look, I'm sure you all know I'd probably be classified as a lefty. Now that I've gotten that out of the way, there is no way in hell the US can disengage from Iraq. If the US pulls out, there will be civil war. The most likely outcome of that is going to be Turkey attacking the Kurds in the north of the country, and an eventual fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iraq.

The only problem is figuring out how to avoid the fundamentalist Islmamic regime there anyways. If I had to guess, I'd say American troops will be in Iraq for at least 10 years.
I'm not sure it will 10 years, but I agree the most stupid thing we could do would be to abandon Iraq right now.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Originally posted by ummbikes
I'm not sure it will 10 years, but I agree the most stupid thing we could do would be to abandon Iraq right now.

Hind sight was always 20/20. Try to make the decision now.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
Originally posted by BurlySurly
Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. I just think we've made a stance...and its been effective. Stopping now is a bad idea. Iraq of course needs to be stabilized...but there are other problems out there.
Here's his foreign policy page from his campaign website: http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/

As far as I can tell it doesn't mention Iran and NK; however, I think one would have to be a moron to not recognize the strategic advantage provided by Bush's "bad-cop" treatment of the outside world. Kerry has done far too much work in the foreign policy arena to be that stupid. Will he take a hard-line isolationist approach like Bush? I doubt it. I would definitely expect him to take advantage of our demonstration of strength though, and the concessions that Bush's policy have forced on several key nations.
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
Originally posted by N8
Hind sight was always 20/20. Try to make the decision now.
Hey Eienstein, I did.

If we left now it would mean even more chaos.

This is an entirely seperate issue than the question of whether or not we should have been there to begin with.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Originally posted by ummbikes
Hey Eienstein, I did.

If we left now it would mean even more chaos.

This is an entirely seperate issue than the question of whether or not we should have been there to begin with.


Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... woulda, coulda, shoulda... are of little relavance at this point.
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
Originally posted by N8
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... woulda, coulda, shoulda... are of little relavance at this point.
Are you allowed to vote and carry a firearm? On any anti-psychotic drugs?

We are not discussing woulda, coulda, shoulda, it was commented that leaving now would be bad. I agreed.

How are you not seeing this?

Seriously, any medical conditions that might explain your apparant lack of comprehension?
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Originally posted by ummbikes
Are you allowed to vote and carry a firearm? On any anti-psychotic drugs?

We are not discussing woulda, coulda, shoulda, it was commented that leaving now would be bad. I agreed.

How are you not seeing this?

Seriously, any medical conditions that might explain your apparant lack of comprehension?
Admit it, you know your mindless blind hatred (and you are a hater) of Pres Bush prevents you from seeing the all the good that has come from the Iraqi liberation.
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
Originally posted by N8
Admit it, you know your mindless blind hatred (and you are a hater) of Pres Bush prevents you from seeing the all the good that has come from the Iraqi liberation.
Yawn.

I have been wrenching on my Jeep tonite, I have the rear spring pack in now.

Could you come over and fetch me beers?

Since your just spinning your wheels here, I figure you might as well do something worthy tonite.
 

nydave

Chimp
May 8, 2003
61
0
Orange Co. NY
I like beer, in fact, I'm drinkin' a Bud right now. Jeeps are cool, I used to have a CJ7. I'm a moderate to conservative registered Democrat. And I will vote for GW Bush again.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Originally posted by nydave
I like beer, in fact, I'm drinkin' a Bud right now. Jeeps are cool, I used to have a CJ7. I'm a moderate to conservative registered Democrat. And I will vote for GW Bush again.
sorry, you drink bud, therefore your opinion doesn't count :D
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
Originally posted by LordOpie
sorry, you drink bud, therefore your opinion doesn't count :D
Yep, I'm slumming with Redhook tonite. The damn Snow Cap is all gone for the season.


Oh, N8 is ignorant and Bush is a bad, bad man. (Got to keep it political.)
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Originally posted by ummbikes
Yep, I'm slumming with Redhook tonite. The damn Snow Cap is all gone for the season.
hey, redhook ain't that bad. Give New Belgium's 1554 Black Ale a try. It's a nice change. (They make the somewhat popular Fat Tire)
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Originally posted by N8
The President is leading the fight against Terror, John Kerry fighting his post Vietnam image.

Is that photo real? (As in not faked?)

Does the US public buy an image that corny (and manipulative)?
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
Originally posted by fluff
Does the US public buy an image that corny (and manipulative)?
46% of them do. they love it.

I can't imagine it has much of a positive effect on the 8% that are swing voters, but then again, I'm not one of them.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Originally posted by fluff
Is that photo real? (As in not faked?)

Does the US public buy an image that corny (and manipulative)?
actually, I think that photo is genuine -- I don't remember that one specifically, but they took a lot. And, at the time, everyone bought it because Bush appeared to be totally sincere. I think he was and I don't really like the guy. You can tell it's not faked or staged cuz Bush doesn't really have that stupid smirk on his face... hey, I'm the President, this is way cool. Bush is like the Keanu Reeves of Presidents.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Originally posted by LordOpie
actually, I think that photo is genuine -- I don't remember that one specifically, but they took a lot. And, at the time, everyone bought it because Bush appeared to be totally sincere. I think he was and I don't really like the guy. You can tell it's not faked or staged cuz Bush doesn't really have that stupid smirk on his face... hey, I'm the President, this is way cool. Bush is like the Keanu Reeves of Presidents.
Of course there is no way I can tell whether he is sincere or not. What surprises me is that the picture is so corny. What I mean is that if you wanted to make a spoof corny Bush photo-op-junkie style picture it would probably not be a lot different.
 

nydave

Chimp
May 8, 2003
61
0
Orange Co. NY
I can tell you that that photo was unrehearsed and is for real. I remember it in all the local papers. To all you Bush haters... sorry about that. I guess it's too bad he doesn't have that photogenic quality that Bill Clinton had.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Originally posted by ohio
I would definitely expect him to take advantage of our demonstration of strength though, and the concessions that Bush's policy have forced on several key nations.
Man,

Id like to hope so, because I think now, that Bush probably wont make it through this election. But as you keep saying, you keep hoping and expecting Kerry to be alot of things that he hasnt come out and actually said. If you read earleir threads...I'd wanted Kerry because I figure he is the most practical of the Dems. My guess and hope is that he'll pretty much keep the country the same as it is for awhile. He doesnt seem like the kind of guy who wants to make a ripple in history to me (unlike Dean or Clark) but more just the guy who wants to be the president. I could live with that.