Joho the Blog
|
|
|
March 03, 2004
I listened to Kerry's victory speech last night and was impressed. Perhaps because he's an opportunist (yeah, this is going to be a left-handed compliment at best), he has absorbed the best messages from the other candidates. I thought his rhetoric and the set of issues he propounded were right on. (I wish the Internet and innovation were on his radar screen, but that's my own little "special interest.") I just hope that he hasn't peaked. All three Boston Globe columnists today worry that his shallowness will be exposed over the long term. Why is he running, other than to dethrone King W? I believe Edwards and Dean had issues that kept them going, in addition to their personal ambition of course. Edwards cared about the immorality of there being two Americas. Dean had an inchoate vision of what a great country set free from special interests could do. I honestly can't tell you what gets Kerry going. And I've been paying attention. I desperately hope Kerry figures it out. The item on his list that struck me as having the most potential — keeping in mind that I have never ever once been right about this sort of thing — is the idea that Bush the Uniter has been Bush the Divider. Maybe Kerry's announced destiny is to pull America together again, rejecting the wedge politics Bush has been practicing here and abroad. Of course, I'm predisposed to this message as a registered Deaniac and Netiac. Mini Bogus Contest: What Kerry bumpersticker would be worth driving down the re-sale value of your car?
One nation again Back together Because we are all Americans For the America we love Divorced Bush, Married Kerry, Got Custody of the Supreme Court Cross-posted at Loose Democracy Posted
by D. Weinberger at March 3, 2004 10:57 AM
|
Comments
Kerry = Hoynes
"Senator, you're the prohibitive favorite to be the Democratic Party's nominee for President. You have 58 million dollars in war chest with no end in sight, and... I don't know what we're for... I don't know what we're for, and I don't know what we're against. Except we seem to be for winning and against somebody else winning."
http://communicationsoffice.tripod.com/2-01.txt
Posted by: Bill Seitz | March 3, 2004 01:18 PM
this gets my vote:
Divorced Bush, Married Kerry, Got Custody of the Supreme Court
Posted by: Peter | March 3, 2004 01:53 PM
I wish Kerry would take more of a stand on the issues that reflects his own beliefs instead of being guided by the polls and taking opposing views that end up making him look like a hypocrite.
Posted by: Peter | March 3, 2004 04:51 PM
Yeah, Peter, I like that one, too.
But as for this Bush being a divider thing, I think that's clearly false. Who else could have united the Democratic Party, the vast majority of 2000 Nader voters, and a lot of formerly-apathetic non-voters?
And there's the thing, Bill--it's not against Bush winning, but against Bush continuing his policies.
Posted by: adamsj | March 3, 2004 05:53 PM
Well, Bartlet self-destructed, so I guess we gotta vote for Hoynes.
How about a bumper sticker that says
HOYNES/EDWARDS 2004
?
Posted by: Carny Asada | March 3, 2004 06:55 PM
For a vision, how about what Gore Vidal pushed to Christopher Lydon in their interview: Restore the Constitution!
Posted by: bob gimlich | March 3, 2004 09:44 PM
nutz
Bumper Sticker
Reject Kerry Send Bush Home to TX
Let's try four years with no president
Posted by: Ted Williams | March 5, 2004 03:05 AM
My bumper sticker: ANYBODY but Bush!
Posted by: Steve Stroh | March 5, 2004 11:05 AM
i'am not from usa so... i have a quetion .. whois Kerry ?
Posted by: saga cloud | March 5, 2004 02:01 PM
I think I finally understand the liberal position in the Iraq war.
After watching the first debate, I realized something that John Kerry, John Edwards, M. Moore, the DNC, and most liberals don't understand. They don't understand that when Bush talks about invading Iraq because of 911, he DOES NOT MEAN WE INVADED IRAQ IN REVENGE FOR 911!!!!!
We invaded Iraq AS A RESULT OF FOREIGN POLICY CHANGES FORCED BY 911!!!!!
HERE IS A SIMPLE EXAMPLE...
Imagine you are principal of a high school. You come out of the building and your car has been spray painted with graffiti.
As principal, you would probably do a few things in response to the act of vandalism.
1) Search for the student that did it (War in Afghanistan, search for Bin Laden)
2) Make a new school policy of no markers and no spray paint allowed, and no student access to the faculty parking lot (Patriot Act)
3) Search the lockers of problem students who are on probation or have been caught vandilizing before (UN Inspections of Iraq)
4) Suspend or expel the particular problem students who refuse to permit their lockers to be searched (Iraq War)
I'd have to say those responses are actually fairly reasonable.
Posted by: dcuttr | October 1, 2004 04:35 AM