Heraldblog
Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
| Guestbook |
| Archives |
| Contacts |
| Subscribe |
| About |
 |
Don't write off the south
Wrong, says Jack Bass, professor of humanities and social sciences at the College of Charleston, in today's NY Times:"Despite a slight Republican tilt in state politics, genuine two-party competition has emerged in the South, with political independents holding the balance of power. A South Carolina survey last fall, for example, found that 31 percent of registered voters identified themselves as independents; many of them are suburban dwellers who can identify with Mr. Edwards's upward mobility. In addition, Mr. Edwards's "two Americas" speech resonates both with blacks and working-class whites, especially the tens of thousands in the Carolinas who have lost jobs as textile and apparel plants have moved overseas."
The Edwards factor turns narrow Bush leads in Louisiana, Tennessee, Virginia and Arkansas into contested races.
Stayin' alive
The only remotely compelling reason that I can see for voting for George Bush this fall is that he stands between the American people and millions of crazed jihadists who want to kill us. Staying alive trumps any political consideration you can think of. Yap all you want about medicare, faith-based initiatives, personal freedoms, taxation, employment, whatever, but none of that matters if there's a real chance that your friendly neighborhood Islamofascist is going to waste you and your family.
So that's a good thing for the Republicans, right? Well, not really. Because if all Bush can sell is a clear-eyed vision that will save us from the terrorists, then his entire campaign must be based on fear. I'm not convinced that's going to fly with the majority of Americans. Fear sells mouthwash. Fear sells insurance. But fear won't sell Bush. Not now.
Kerry's approach to The War Against Terror has been criticized as being too close to Dubya's. And to be honest, I don't see an awful lot of difference between the two. Both men want to stay the course in Iraq, and both want to see more involvement in Iraq by the UN or NATO.
This is not a problem for Kerry. There is no need for the Senator from Massachusetts to sign on to a cut-and-run policy, which is the only real alternative. So who is John Kerry? Simple: He's a relief pitcher. A closer. Bush led off the game with a solid performance in Afghanistan, where he shut down the Taliban, and in the late innings he fanned Saddam. But now that we've built up a comfortable lead, it's tiime to put the game on ice. To leave the strained baseball analogy, it's time to digest the gains we've made, step back, and reappraise the situation. It's like one of those abysmal extreme makeover shows. Bush ripped up the 70s vintage linoleum in the kitchen, ripped down the tacky chandelier, and demolished the dreary faux-walnut panelled wall between the den and the breezeway. It was all necessary, and we all sense that something much nicer is about to replace it. But building stuff isn't Bush's job. He's the wrecking crew. Kerry is the craftsman.
At this point it's tempting to quote Sam Rayburn's dictum that "Any jackass can tear down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one." But that wouldn't be fair to Bush, or accurate. As I've written before, I still believe that Bush did the right thing in Afghanistan and Iraq, but for the wrong reasons. He's surrounded himself with idealogues and slimeballs, misled the public, and rebranded America as a war mongering nation state that tortures its enemies. But if John Kerry has a chance of prevailing this fall, he needs to publicly recognize the historic opportunities that a free Iraq has for American interests, and build from there.
8.7.04 18:51
|
ponnyj / Website (8.7.04 21:01) nice post....One big problem I have with Bush is that when you look under the rhetoric of war and fear, you find that much of it is hollow. Case in point is the funding for Homeland Security, where places that are Red States get more per capita than New York or California, which are arguably much more likely to get attacked than Wyoming. Serious thought on policy is so lacking with this administration. Hightened rhetoric is good when you back it up with serious policy. However, by ignoring the policy aspect of terrorism, we are leaving ourselves more susceptible to attack while simultaneously making ourselves "feel" safer with hightened rhetoric. That's bad news for whoever is President the next time we are attacked. That is why I could never bring myself to vote for Bush. There is just too much evidence that he has not taken the threat of terrorism seriously enough to actually save lives. The Iraq War reeks of Machiavelli: Appearances are more important than reality. That is, by attacking Iraq Bush was able to create the impression that he was tough on terrorism and responding to September 11. The cold reality is that not only was Iraq not related to September 11, but it also made things worse: our military is stretched to the breaking point, we have created an instable Middle East, and OBL is still on the loose. Bush has had his chance and I don't think he deserves another one. Kerry is going to have an uphill climb if he is elected, but I trust him a lot more than I trust Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Ashcroft. |
|
Josh / Website (9.7.04 18:49) Great post! |
|
(19.1.06 14:51) Hello, these are several links to pharm resources. http://acyclovir-blog.somee.com http://adderall-blog.somee.com http://ambien-blog.somee.com http://buy-valium-blog.somee.com Also it will help you to be healthy! http://carisoprodol-blog.somee.com http://cialis-blog.somee.com http://codeine-blog.somee.com http://didrex-blog.somee.com http://fioricet-blog.somee.com http://hgh-blog.somee.com We'll be glad to see you  http://lingerie-sexy.somee.com If it's not interesting, just delete this post and we will newer post here anything like this |