Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (387591)	4/7/2003 10:27:24 PM
From: SeachRE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Clinton was a president with no clothes. Indeed.>>Bush is an emperor with no clothes.<<

To: American Spirit who wrote (387591)	4/7/2003 10:54:05 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Respond to of 769670

KERRY STUBS HIS TOE THOMAS OLIPHANT April 6, 2003 WASHINGTON John Kerry goofed in the middle of war last week. Instead of decrying the reaction to his goof, he should learn from it. In presidential politics, the damaging mistakes have more than one dimension; that's when they resonate. Unfortunately for Kerry, his had four: rhetorical, substantive, political, and contextual. The first two dimensions were obvious; the other two are potentially more serious. In rhetoric, parallelisms should be parallel. The term "regime change" belongs to Saddam Hussein in US politics. For someone running to replace George Bush, it is perhaps cute to recommend, as Kerry did intemperately in New Hampshire last week, regime change for this country as well - but it is also dumb. The reason is that the line may not directly imply moral equivalence, but you can be positive that other politicians (especially hypocritical right-wingers on demonization duty) will infer same. It is always dumb to hand opponents an easy attack line. It's also misguided to use the word regime, with an antidemocratic connotation, about the United States. President Bush heads an administration, a government. Popular votes and Florida aside, his presidency is the result of constitutional process and it is legitimate. Regime implies otherwise. It is used for dictators and authoritarians, based on its Latin root that is all about ruling, not governing. Substantively, Kerry's remarks in Peterborough made a case that Bush has so botched relations with other countries' leaders, allies, and diplomatic adversaries that he is no longer trusted. The situation is so poisoned, Kerry said on the basis of his own discussions with UN diplomats in between New York fund-raisers, that only a new president with a broader view of the world and America's place in it can repair the deep damage. That's way over the top. I'm aware of what some of those officials say in private about Bush, and it's pretty ugly and mostly accurate, but it's also the case that these are all pols who know from experience how dynamic world affairs are and how quickly situations change. Kerry's assertion that all is lost tends to undercut vigorous efforts that are ongoing to repair the prewar damage. What Kerry should have done was discuss the economy or the environment, or issue a ringing call to hold Bush to his Azores pledge with Spain and Britain to involve the international community deeply in Iraq's reconstruction. It is vital that the war's aftermath not be seen in the world or inside Iraq as a US occupation. Kerry missed a chance to show off one of his most important credentials - his rich understanding of the world and foreign policy - and help lead the postwar discussion. Instead, he made remarks that did not transcend the petty context of early primary politics. It may sound like hitting him with a wet noodle, but the toughest thing that can be said is that Kerry is much better than this. Politically, it should be axiomatic among challengers to a sitting president, that you never say or do anything on the long road to the nomination that complicates the even tougher road to actual election. The swift reaction from Republican quote machines was predictably hypocritical, as anyone with access to what Tom Delay said when Bill Clinton belatedly rescued the Balkans from genocide and protected a vital US interest in European stability can discover. But it was also more than a hint that what amounted to a personal attack on Bush in the midst of war will be remembered if Kerry wins the nomination. American public opinion supports this war reluctantly, as does Kerry. But this is the second time (the first was his "rush to war" speech before the conflict began) that Kerry has had difficulty articulating his support as well as his reservations and criticisms without exposing himself to the suggestion that he wants to be for and against the war at the same time. In politics, clarity trumps fudge. Contextually, Kerry has no doubt learned by now that the kibitzing in presidential politics is relentless. And his popping off in Peterborough came during a period when his campaign made the tactical goof of raising expectations about his fund-raising juggernaut and failed to meet them, when the buzz about the truly antiwar Howard Dean remains loud among Democrats, and after Kerry's campaign has spent two months basking in the perilous glow of the F-word (as in front-runner). Front-runners exist mostly in their own and the press's minds. The concept may be mildly useful for fund-raising, but Kerry's surprising second place, first-quarter finish to John Edwards should put that notion to rest. A more enduring point is that every serious candidate for president must survive at least one near-death experience. I doubt the Peterborough Pop-off qualifies, but it's close enough that Kerry should take care to learn from it. Thomas Oliphant's e-mail address is oliphant@globe.com. © Copyright 2003 New York Times Company

To: American Spirit who wrote (387591)	4/7/2003 11:05:17 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

This poem, by an anonymous author, may help us to understand why is sometimes necessary to go to war: It is the soldier, not the reporter, Who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, Who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, Who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, not the lawyer, Who has given us the right to a fair trial. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, Serves under the flag and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn that same flag.