The Voting Mango
All Presidential Politics from here till November
Monday, March 08, 2004
From the Department of Fisks
has a beautiful fisk of Kerry's Time interview. He ends with this, which pretty much describes my voting plans:
Based on everything I know about him now, I cannot in good conscience consider voting for him. I would rather vote for a candidate with known policies with which I disagree than for a candidate whose true policies – if any – are kept hidden under a bushel basket, at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, in a dis-used lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the leopard".
From the Department of Peace Through Superior Firepower II
One more thing: How naive does John Kerry have to be to think that other heads of state would prefer to have him president? Does he see it as them wanting him to be part of their club? Maybe he thinks that they would prefer to toodle around on his yacht than to help Bush clear brush in Crawford? Yeah, not so much. They like him cuz he's the easy mark, the good cop, the prof of the blow-off class. None of these are good things to be.
From the Department of Ostriches
"I suggested that all the evils of Saddam Hussein alone were not a cause to go to war." -- John Kerry in a new Time
Good God, man, what's wrong with you?!? Yet ol' Slobodan was worth it? I really would love you to look a group of Iraqis, liberated from decades of torture, fear, and brutality under Saddam, in the eye, and tell them that. You're a liberal, John. You're supposed to care
about suffering people.
From the Department of With Friends Like These
Read this article
. Keep a trashbin handy.
It begins "North Korea is staunchly in the "anybody but George W. Bush" camp in the U.S. election, but South Korean critics of the president say Pyongyang would be unwise to stall nuclear talks and hope for "regime change" in Washington."
Alright, reread that first bit: "North Korea is staunchly in the "anybody but George W. Bush" camp in the U.S. election."
Well, duh. Of course they are. This is an excellent reason to re-elect him. A blog I read earlier this evening (and for the life of me can't find again) said something to the effect of "Anybody who can count Saddam, Chirac, Kim Jong Il, Bin Laden and the mullahs as enemies has to be doing something right." Exactly.
Imagine how this would have read at various other points in history -- just fill in the dictator/country, leader, and country -- History Mad-Libs.
) is staunchly in the 'anybody but (leader
)' camp in the (country
"Hitler is staunchly in the 'anybody but Winston Churchill' camp in the British election."
"The USSR is staunchly in the 'anybody but Ronald Reagan' camp in the US election."
"Saddam Hussein is staunchly in the 'anybody not named Bush' camp in the US election."
Etc. Isn't this fun!
From the Department of Peace Through Superior Firepower
Just when you thought he couldn't get any more disturbing, John Kerry starts running around declaring
that a bunch of foreign leaders who-must-not-be-named support him for president, like it's a good thing. It's not. It doesn't take much imagination to guess who these leaders are. (In fact, it seems that Kim Jong Il is thrilled about the idea of Kerry.) The principal reason why those they dislike Bush is that, to borrow from Morpheus, his beliefs and actions do not require their agreement or approval. In fact, many of these leaders (Chirac, Putin) are textbook corrupt regime-stooges, what with under-the-table payoffs and deals with Saddam. The fact that he can't come out an name these leaders is probably proof enough that that they're probably not the sort the American people wants their president beholden to. I see a large number of freedom-fry-eating Americans having a problem with Kerry being endorsed by Jacque "I only ran for this office to postpone jail" Chirac on the grounds that he'd be more pliable.
Yet many Americans want us to be beholden to people like them who are beholden to dictators like him. Once again, not a good thing. Europe does not have America's best interests at heart. It would like to see America just strong enough to come in and save it if the need arises, but not smart enough or determined enough or independent enough to start making decisions on its own.
Contrary to what the existance of institutions like the UN might imply, geopolitics is not a team sport. Sure, there are times when coalitions are useful, but the mere existance of a coalition (think Germany, Italy, Japan) does not a good thing make. One of my friends recently, as reason for hating Bush, bemoaned that "now all the other countries hate us." First of all, it's not a new thing. I remember being in the Thessaloniki, Greece during the (Clinton Administration) Balkan War and seeing anti-American slogans everywhere, and being prepared to be Canadian if asked. Iran, Iraq, and a fair chunk of the Middle East have regarded us as terrorists for quite a while. As those governments are/were terroristic/despotic/evil, that wasn't too much sweat off our backs. If you want to be liked, be Miss America or something. Second, it's not a bad thing. There are two main types of countries that dislike us: 1) the kind that dislike us and are too civilized (or something) to do anything about it besides threaten a UN veto, and 2) the kind that dislike us and try to kill us. Fortunately, those kinds of societies tend to understand power. Therefore, while it is not critical for them to like us, it is essential that they respect us.
Beyond all this, I agree
that it's entirely inappropriate for Kerry to be in contact with foriegn leaders at all. States aren't allowed to have their own foreign policies, and neither, I think, should citizens or, specifically, presidential candidates. They can have prospective foreign policies, they can have prefered foreign policies, but as for actually going out and committing acts of foreign policy, especially in ways that are not edifying to the current administration (and I'm looking at you too here, Mr. Carter), I consider that to be almost treason.
From the Department of Tastlessness
Alright, follow closely here:
According to the Kerry website, at a fundraiser "when Teresa Heinz-Kerry arrived, she handed me a pin that read in the center: “Asses of Evil” with “Bush”, “Cheney”, “Rumsfeld” and “Ashcroft” surrounding it. She met, greeted and talked to a jam-packed room of Kerry supporters and others who came for the MoveOn documentary. Many were curious, others undecided, or belonging to other candidate camps. "
Bush, on the other hand, in his campaign ads, reminds Americans of his leadership through the first major attack on the American mainland in almost 200 years, and is widely derided as tasteless, crass, etc.
From the Department of Touche
also has a magnificent take on whether or not the Zarqawi memo is true.
"I have been studying the Zarqawi letter very carefully and I think this is a most interesting and important document. Cynically speaking, it may be one of the most accurate and faithful appraisals of the situation in Iraq, notwithstanding the blind hatred and vituperation. Of course the chorus of monkeys have been jumping up and down and squeaking and screaming ever since its publication- It is a CIA forgery, American propaganda etc. etc.!! What I say is this: If the Americans are so clever as to produce this masterpiece of counterfeit, it might have been more worthwhile for them to do something about the missing WMD’s and the like. I mean if the CIA has such fine understanding of the mind of these people and such historical and theological depth a lot of this trouble might have been avoided. Forgive me for saying this folks; the “Americans” are just too dumb to produce something like this. "
, an Iraqi blogger has this to say (thanks to Buzzmachine
"Some time ago one friend commented something about my being anti-Bush!! And It has been in the back of mind ever since to say something about this. Me, anti-Bush!!!
Regardless of any election campaign, this man has already established himself in our hearts and minds, and forever. And it is one of my cherished dreams that one day his statue will stand in the middle of Baghdad and that all the people realize finally and unequivocally the friendship that this president of America had for them and the great favor that he has done them.
We sure wish that he be re-elected to complete the great work that he started. The job does not need any new experimenting and trial and error. But of course this is not for us to decide and we have to wait for the decision of the American people.
Nevertheless, and for my self I wish to send my heartfelt best wishes to my favorite American, El Bush, the Liberator, the Avenger."
JFK2, if you're wondering what the answer to the 'unfair' "Was it worth it?" question is, this should help you along.
From the Department of Impulsive Panderflipping
has yet another marvelous take on Kerry and his pandering, flipping, and flopping. He also coins the term 'Impulsive Panderflipping' which sounds like either a new Olympic sport, or some Iron Chef technique.
And another thing:
Last night I read an article someplace about how Kerry thought that "Was Iraq worth it?" was an unfair question because he couldn't see how it would turn out ten years from now. My feeling here is that automatically disqualifies him from being president. Not his opinion -- I would have a problem with him saying no, but I'd accept that as an answer -- but his inability to judge the merits of things. If he is only able to judge things with the benefit of hindsight, then he needs to go be a historian or a pundit. He has no business controlling the course of history.
George W. Bush
Assorted News and Propaganda
The Resplendent Mango -- My Personal Blog