Bush: When I say "we cannot win the WOT," I mean "we will win the WOT."

[Ladewig]

Herald tribune (http://www.iht.com/articles/536706.html)


NEW YORK President George W. Bush said Tuesday that "we will win" the war on terror as he sought to end a controversy that has turned attention from Republicans' efforts here to portray him as an exceptionally resolute leader.
.
This was a turnabout from his assertion, in an interview aired Monday as the Republican nominating convention opened, that struggle against terrorism might never end.
.
In a speech Tuesday in Nashville, Tennessee, Bush said, "We meet today in a time of war for our country, a war we did not start, yet one that we will win." That was a return to the sort of determined language he has repeatedly used in the nearly three years since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In the earlier interview, he said he did not "think you can win" the war on terror, but that conditions could be set to make terrorists "less acceptable in certain parts of the world."


To be fair, GWB is saying we can win because after he expressed doubts, all the Democrats said, "we can win, we can win." Bush could have elaborated on his remark and explained the difficulties in eliminating a tactic, but nuances aren't popular with the American voter (or the American radio host), so Bush jumped from grey to white.


That's what makes U.S. national politics so ***** awful. The Dems could have come back to say that the president is correct and we should all work together to be realistic in our planning.

[hgc]

Originally posted by Ladewig
...
That's what makes U.S. national politics so ***** awful. The Dems could have come back to say that the president is correct and we should all work together to be realistic in our planning. Kerry should do no such thing. This is an election season, and every time he utters agreement with the president it hurts his election chances. He has to present himself as an ALTERNATIVE on every front.

I am saying this in all seriousness. Kerry may agree or not, but he should be blasting Bush's doors off for being wishy-washy, pessimistic and uncertain.

Kerry, BREATHE FIRE goddamnit, or you should have let someone else have the nomination.

[TragicMonkey]

Kerry doesn't need to do anything. Merely by existing as an alternative to Bush, he gets votes. Whether it's enough, we'll find out in November. Or December, if we have the same fiasco as last time.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by hgc
Kerry should do no such thing. This is an election season, and every time he utters agreement with the president it hurts his election chances. He has to present himself as an ALTERNATIVE on every front.

Or even two alternatives, depending on the day of the week. :)

I am saying this in all seriousness. Kerry may agree or not, but he should be blasting Bush's doors off for being wishy-washy, pessimistic and uncertain.

More likely he's thinking of suing Bush for copyright infringement. After all, the flip-flop is Kerry's bit!

Kerry, BREATHE FIRE goddamnit, or you should have let someone else have the nomination.

Right now, democrats would be ecstatic to see him breathe, period.

Sorry for busting your balls, hgc, but you lined them all up so well I couldn't resist. :D

[hgc]

Originally posted by Jocko
Or even two alternatives, depending on the day of the week. :)

More likely he's thinking of suing Bush for copyright infringement. After all, the flip-flop is Kerry's bit!

Right now, democrats would be ecstatic to see him breathe, period.

Sorry for busting your balls, hgc, but you lined them all up so well I couldn't resist. :D Hey, it's only funny until someone gets hurt. Oops! That already happened to a few thousand American soldiers, not to mention their dead comrades who don't even deserve to have their numerous, flag-draped coffins photographed.

Sorry for veering into serous mode. Yes, I did set them up. That's your only free ride for this week. ;)

[Crossbow]

And lest we forget when Bush said to the terrorists and other attackers:

"Bring it on!"

[Ladewig]

Originally posted by hgc
Kerry should do no such thing. This is an election season, and every time he utters agreement with the president it hurts his election chances. He has to present himself as an ALTERNATIVE on every front.
.


I understand that what you suggest is necessary to win this campaign. I only wish that both sides could act rationally when it comes to this country's safety. I'd rather see resources devoted to ports and chemical plants than devoted to checking phonetic spellings of airline passenger names.

[Questioninggeller]

Originally posted by Ladewig
I only wish that both sides could act rationally when it comes to this country's safety.

Rationally? But this is politics.

[epepke]

Originally posted by hgc
I am saying this in all seriousness. Kerry may agree or not, but he should be blasting Bush's doors off for being wishy-washy, pessimistic and uncertain.

That makes sense in terms of tit-for-tat, but you miss the mythos of Peanuts. Only people who already think like Lucy consider "wishy-washy" an insult.

Going on the offensive here is not going to score Kerry any points. If he wants to score points, he should write a nice ironic speech congratulating Bush on momentarily recognizing the truth.

Kerry's main problem is that a lot of would-be supporters would rather sit around doing bong hits and going "Hyulk, hyulk. If voting could change anything, it would be illegal. Me's so smart." Being supercilious and smug and superior is what it's all about. If Kerry would only just tap into that, he'd be unstoppable.

Yeah, he needs to breathe fire, but a different kind of fire. A kind of "get off your ass and vote" kind of fire.