BUSH IS RUNNING ON 9/11; KERRY SHOULD RUN ON 9/12
By Arianna Huffington
It's a puzzling paradox: Recent polls show that voters are more worried
that we are losing the war on terror, more convinced that we're about
to be attacked, and more certain that the invasion of Iraq has put
America at greater risk from terrorists. And yet, these same voters
overwhelmingly believe that President Bush will do a better job of protecting
them from terrorists than John Kerry.
Isn't that like believing that the embezzler who just ran off with your
life's savings is the perfect guy to manage your finances?
Indeed, national security is one of the precious few issues on which
voters think Bush is up to snuff — the same voters who turn thumbs down
on his handling of the deficit, jobs, health insurance, the environment,
Social Security and Iraq. Which is why the Bush campaign is starting to
resemble one of those single-issue cable networks: the 24-hour Terror
War Channel — All Anxiety, All the Time.
Whether it's Bush's flag-draped campaign ads, his newly aggressive
defense of the Patriot Act, or Karen Hughes' mind-boggling linking of
abortion rights and al-Qaida, our war president's message is clear: "Vote
for me or your days may be numbered."
In response, Kerry has entered into a hissing contest with Bush over
whose national security plank is more impressive: "My first responder is
bigger than yours!"
But trying to out-macho the counterfeit Cowboy from Crawford is the
wrong strategy.
I say let Bush run on 9/11; Kerry needs to run on 9/12.
Remember Sept. 12, 2001? On that day blood banks overflowed, money
poured into charities, and so many people turned up to help at Ground Zero
that most had to be turned away. It was the best of times amidst the
worst of times. In the wake of that horrific attack, Americans were eager
to work for the common good — to be called to a large, collective
purpose.
But George Bush squandered his chance to tap into that national
impulse.
Granted, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the president paid a lot
of lip service to the concept of shared sacrifice. "We have much to do,
and much to ask of the American people," he said in a speech four days
after the attacks. And at a press conference a month later, he echoed
the theme, saying simply: "America is sacrifice."
But there is a world of difference between spouting Churchillian
rhetoric and championing a cause that will transform our society. Far from
using his post-9/11 political capital to rally us as a nation to a vision
that is bigger than the things that divide us, all the president called
on us to do was to go shopping and "get down to Disney World in
Florida."
John F. Kennedy asked us to "ask not" what our country can do for us.
George Bush asked us to open our wallets.
But spending a wad of cash should not be all that our leaders ask of
us. The truest expression of American character has always been not our
will to amuse ourselves but our choice to give of ourselves.
Nevertheless, nearly three years down the war-on-terror road, the only
sacrifices being made are by those risking, and all too frequently
giving, their lives on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq — and by
their families back home.
And I don't think the newly approved bill allowing members of the
National Guard and Army Reserve to tap into their IRAs without penalty will
make up for the repeated extended deployments they're having to endure.
Despite the passage of time, the values and spirit that emerged on 9/12
are still very much a part of who we are as a country — and they can
still be harnessed if we have a president who will appeal to more than
voters' narrow self-interest and unspoken prejudices. A president with
the fortitude to ask more of each and every one of us.
That's why Kerry needs to take a page from FDR's Civilian Conservation
Corps, JFK's Peace Corps and LBJ's Vista, and usher in a new era of
national service and shared sacrifice.
George Bush seems convinced that the way to win is by playing on our
fears. John Kerry can prove that the answer lies in appealing to our
better instincts.
The choice awaiting the American people in November couldn't be more
clear-cut: Vote your fears or vote your hopes. If we do the former, Bush
wins. But if we are inspired to do the latter, we could reach the 50
percent of eligible voters who've given up on our democracy — and it
could be Kerry in a landslide.
© 2004 ARIANNA HUFFINGTON. |
