I'll probably vote for Bush, but I really don't care about Bush's political survival. What I'm more worried about is the Republican party, and Rasmussen's tracking poll consistently shows us being beat by the Democrats by 43 to 38%
I find that an intriguing statement. On the one hand you clearly have the ability to see how damaging and doomed the Bush Administrations machinations were in Iraq. You didn't buy into the "open arms and flowers," you didn't buy into the "critical threat to our security" justification, and you didn't buy into the argument that the insurgency was from a handful of "dead enders, terrorists and Saddam lovers." You don't seem to feel that history will treat us gently on this war; based on either its justifications or its outcome. You don't seem to underestimate the long term problems we're facing with a destabilized Gulf region and with more potential terrorists who seem to be more passionately opposed to America.
If I'm correct then you must believe that this administration is, at best, incompetent in foreign affairs yet, in spite of this, you say you will "probably vote for Bush." Is it because when you refer to the Republicans you say "us?"
Is your party loyalty so great that you'd vote to ratify the unilateral and rash actions of Bush in the eyes of the world as "American approved?" Is that loyalty so great that you're unwilling to give a non-republican administration a chance to prove it's not incompetent or, if it is, that it's not dangerously dogmatic? Or are there other factors that you see as balancing the dangerous and bloody incompetency that this administration has revealed at the core of its being?
Or maybe I am mistaken about your beliefs. Do you, in fact, think the Bush administration has performed well in foreign affairs?
I'm genuinely curious. |
