4/12/2004

KERRY ON IRAQ? FUHGEDABOUDIT

While everyone is posturing right and left about "The Memo" there are two things we need to keep in mind.
1. The memo clearly warned about an impending attack somewhere on U.S. soil.
2. The president gets a hundred memos per day about something important. Q: Were there any other "memos"?

Sorry folks, but security is the president's first responsibility. I think when all is said and done the memo will be looked at as one of a thousand "important" documents and the public will give him a pass. People have used similar "warnings" when they have attempted to blame President Roosevelt for negligence regarding the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. I'd say that voter attitudes had plenty to do with both Bush and Roosevelt not being fully prepared. If you check "working class" newspapers in the six months before Pearl you will see that something awful about Japan is on the front page almost every day, yet the American public was totally opposed to going to war. Do the same before 9/11 and you will hardly ever see a word about bin Ladin; the American public wanted to party. Given those circumstances, both presidents "didn''t do enough". In Bush's case, his near total lack of communication skills regarding our purposes may sink him yet. This leads many of us to think that he may not know why we are there. The great communicators of the recent past, FDR, JFK, and Reagan would let us know exactly. Bush is not in their league, and the dead bodies pile up with no explanation as to why we are in Iraq, why it's important, and what is at stake. What would those former leaders be saying? I don't know but you can bet they'd be out front every day. And then we have the total silence of John Kerry.

The Ben-Veniste’s factor The public seems to have landed on this phony with a thud. His "question" asking for the title of the memo and only the title without divulging the content was so slimy that only a lawyer could come up with it. Just about everybody saw what the scumbag was trying to do, and it was not looking out for the future security of the country. In the strange way these things play out it may be the pond scum ethics of this reptilian Democrat that will get Bush a pass. In fact he, Kerry, and Gorelick (the woman former senator and long time Democratic partisan hack) look so much worse than Rice one can only ask who would you trust?

No comments: