SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (81306)10/28/2004 3:35:43 AM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (4) of 793781
 
I think it comes down to: he doesn't trust Kerry in any way. If that's your opinion, then I think you have to vote Bush. But it isn't mine. One other thing: there is nothing in his piece about Bush's record

I wish Sullivan would explain how he came to trust Kerry during the course of this campaign when he had pegged as a bloviating poseur as late as last spring. What is there in Kerry's record to inspire trust in his new-found readiness to use force?

As for Bush's record, the most apt comparison is the one both I and Lileks have used: voting for Kerry because you're mad at Bush is like voting for McClellan in 1864 because you're mad at Lincoln. If you wanted the Union to win the war, McClellan was a bad choice because McClellan intended to enter negotiations with the Confederacy, not win the war. Though as I look up details of the campaign, it seems McClellan flip-flopped on that plank of his platform, promising at times to wage a more skillful war than Lincoln. That makes the parallel even closer!

If you want to win a war, you must pick the candidate who really wants to win the war. Wars are hard and costly and there will be many times when surrender tempts the man who always has one eye out for the course of least resistance.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext