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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (25631)	5/25/2004 10:21:30 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Right now we do not have a President. He is loosing it and loosing it fast. He was pathetic at the War Colege speech yesterday, could not even pronounce Abu Ghraib, what is so difficult to pronounce that? He must be a moron If he cannot read Ghraib and prounce it {Ghreyb}. Anyway, a very interesting read: Wed 26 May 2004 Bush speech fails to make major gains on home front Analysis ALEX MASSIE THE underlying message of George Bush’s speech at the Army War College on Monday was "trust me". As his approval rating slumps below 45 per cent, the president of the United States has realised he must do more to get his message out if he is to convince the electorate that the Iraq war was not a mistake and that he deserves to be re-elected this November. Mr Bush’s "five-point plan" for bringing order and stability to Iraq was short on specific proposals and contained little that was new. If he has a clear idea of how the planned transfer of sovereignty will proceed on 30 June, he is keeping it to himself. However, his speech at least clearly outlined the general parameters within which the US hopes to achieve its aims in Iraq. Even so, the speech is unlikely to have much impact. None of the main television networks covered it live, nor did the White House ask them to. It was left to cable news channels to provide coverage. <font color=red>Furthermore, Mr Bush has been such a polarising figure, with the war and its aftermath so controversial that many voters have already made up their minds on the matter.</font> <font color=black>Perhaps most significantly, Mr Bush did hint that the electoral process in Iraq could be speeded up, saying free national elections would be held "no later than next January". That lays open the possibility of elections this autumn, possibly even before the US presidential election in November. Not all of Mr Bush’s arguments were convincing. When he stated that the swift removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime last spring had the unintended effect of allowing some members of Saddam’s elite guards to shed their uniforms and melt into the civilian population, he came close to suggesting the problems in Iraq were as much to do with winning too quickly as with inadequate planning. However, by acknowledging "the way forward may sometimes appear chaotic", Mr Bush came closer than usual to admitting that the situation in Iraq is so unstable that it could tip either in favour of the coalition or the insurgents. Nevertheless, Joe Biden, the senior Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee and one of the more hawkish Democrats on Capitol Hill, declared himself "extremely disappointed" by the speech. "He didn’t answer any of the important questions. I don’t think he levelled with the American people. This may be the last time we have to get it right," he said. Mr Biden was notably more critical than John Kerry, Mr Bush’s electoral opponent, who was content merely to note that much of the president’s speech had been heard before. Mr Kerry called for stronger leadership from Mr Bush, but offered no clear alternative to the course of action the president outlined. Although one poll this week gave Mr Kerry a seven-point lead, yesterday’s Washington Post survey found the two men each attracting 46 per cent support. Despite the stream of bad news from Iraq, Mr Kerry still trails the president when voters are asked which man can be trusted to do a better job on national security maters. Mr Bush held a 13-point advantage on the war on terror and a six-point lead on who could best handle Iraq. Some Democrats fear that Mr Kerry is not doing enough to put forward a positive alternative of his own. Even so, only 38 per cent of voters believe the US is making "significant progress" in Iraq and just 40 per cent approve of the way Mr Bush has conducted his Iraq policy. The polls have been volatile for the past three months and it is reasonable to suppose that they could remain so for some time yet. Mr Bush has bet his presidency on events in Iraq that he can hope to influence but cannot control. It is impossible, at this moment, to predict if this gamble will pay off in the short term for Mr Bush’s political well-being or for the long-term future of the Middle East. The president sounded almost fatalistic when he said: "We did not seek this war on terror, but this is the world as we find it. We must keep our focus. We must do our duty. History is moving, and it will tend toward hope, or toward tragedy." This article: thescotsman.scotsman.com