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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (204596)	10/1/2004 2:43:20 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573921

KERRY DIDN'T GET IT DONE By DAVID WINSTON -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- October 1, 2004 -- ON the day of the most im portant debate in their political lives, President Bush was in shirt sleeves consoling Florida hurricane victims, patting some on the back, hugging others and shaking hands with the tired relief workers. John Kerry had a manicure. If ever there was a metaphor for the difference between these two candidates and their respective relationships with the American people, it was this. As The Weekly Standard's Fred Barnes put Kerry's problem so succinctly last night, "This is a man who really needs to go bowling." For all the back and forth between the two men, the debate did nothing to change that reality. Kerry's pontifical performance was light on specifics, heavy on criticism and plagued by the inconsistencies that have characterized his positions on Iraq for more than a year. While there were few fireworks, I suspect swing voters did come away with a few perceptions. First, Bush knows what he's trying to accomplish. He believes deeply in the rightness of the war in Iraq and its centrality to the larger War on Terror. His message is the same message voters have heard since 9/11 — we will go on the offensive to fight terrorists wherever they are found to keep this nation safe. On the other hand, voters saw Kerry continue to struggle to define his position on the war — justifying his latest position, which is to call the war a mistake, while promising to bring new allies on board to fight for what he terms a "grand diversion." He failed totally to make a convincing case for either his strategic vision, what there is of it, or his so-called four-point tactical plan for winning in Iraq which bears a striking resemblance to what the Bush administration is already doing. Perhaps the most telling moment was the exchange between the two candidates on the issue of North Korea's nuclear program. Here, Kerry, who harshly criticized Bush for rejecting multilateralism in the leadup to the Iraq war, was equally critical of Bush's insistence on maintaining a multilateral approach in dealing with North Korea today. Consistency is clearly not Kerry's strong suit. For all practical purposes, Kerry's debate performance was little more than a replay of his campaign stump speeches. Even his close — "I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as president" — was almost verbatim from his acceptance speech. It didn't work then, and it won't work now. Kerry needed to win this debate decisively. Bush not only held his own but, in a plainspoken passion, showed why voters have more confidence in his leadership in the War on Terror. nypost.com