The Democrat Party has made a monumental strategic
'whoops' of Shakespearean proportions.and it is probably too late for
them to effectively implement a 'do over'.
No amount of Michael Moore revisionism and creative
editing, no stream of books, editorials or mainstream complicity will
be sufficient to overcome the growing compendium of facts that contradict
the preconceived opinions and prejudices of liberal elitists.
The strident, venial and petty screeds which have
become the mantra of the left may be red meat to the hardcore 60s leftover
anachronisms maintaining the base of the Democrats.but that dog ain't
gonna hunt come November.
Bush bad/Kerry good is a flimsy base on which to
build a presidential campaign.
Both sides of the partisan divide routinely refuse
to acknowledge data or arguments they just don't like. However, 'most'
Americans, and for sure the crucial undecided swing voters, are not as
dumb as the elite would hope.
The same harsh Bush critics, who vilify the administration
for 'changing' its story, have demonstrated remarkable hypocrisy and myopia.
Initially the democrats dusted off that old James Carville saw and tried
to blame Bush for the recession (that started and was hidden during Clinton's
last term). However, not only has the economy rebounded (even Allen Greenspan
maintains the growth is healthy and sustainable) but the key contributor
to the robust economy has been the Bush tax cuts that his critics so ardently
opposed. The Dems were wrong and Bush was right.
When the economy's resurrection became obvious to even the naysayers,
they 'changed' focus and said, "Yeah the economy is coming back, BUT..Job
loss under Bush has been worse than under Herbert Hoover. WHOOPS! Jobs
rebounded and net/net the Bush administration has actually 'created' more
jobs than anyone anticipated.
Bush stupid and bad:
That pedestrian name-calling may have coinage on the playground but there
are basic flaws to the tactic.
1) It is not true. The Bill Sammon book,
suggests Bush actually likes his adversaries to underestimate him. The
'perception' that he is not capable actually enhances his eventual successes.
2) Bush is not bad or evil. He is committed...and has a moral compass
that is anathema to the masters of relativism.
The United Nation and 'internationalism':
Kerry and his company of critics accuse Bush of "unilaterally" acting
like a rouge cowboy (gee.isn't that what they said about Reagan?). The
Bush failure(?)/refusal to get a permission slip from the 'United Nothing'
before honoring his oath of office is a red herring. In January 2004,
The Wall Street Journal published a significant (and largely overlooked)
piece called 'The
New Multilateralism /How the U.S., with international cooperation, brought
Libya to heel.' "The media have barely noticed, but the Bush Administration
has embarked on a burst of "multilateral" cooperation. It's called the
Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), and in only a few months of existence
it has already had more success than the United Nations in controlling
weapons of mass destruction.
The PSI is mission-oriented multilateralism and
it works unlike the systemic bureaucracy oriented multilaterlism of the
The Democrats have been picking at scabs relentlessly. While 'trying'
to maintain the obligatory 'support the troops' refrain, they have consistently
maintained we should not have taken out Hussein.
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Bush critics continue
to weave the 'no WMD' duplicity with the "he lied" lie. There is a LONG
list of quotes from the usual suspects (over 25 prominent or at least
noisy Democrats) warning, pleading, and confirming the Iraq WMD axiom.
The litany includes Bill Clinton, Hillary, Al Gore, John Kerry, Ted
Kennedy, Madeline Albright, Jacques 'Flipping' Chirac, Nancy Pelosi,
John Rockefeller, Henry Waxman et al.. John Hawkins collected some of
the more significant quotes and posted them to 'Free
"Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical
and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists,
including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of
his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is
clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue
to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and
will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that
endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the
Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."
-- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that
a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002 .
Notwithstanding Al Gore's screeds, a growing list of 'strange
bedfellows' from the 9/11 Commission Chairs to Stephen F. Hayes
and even Hillary Clinton have acknowledged Saddam and Osama were seeking
I may be the 'Lone Ranger' but despite the pollsters
and pundits 'conventional wisdom', I have told my radio audience, John
Fund (Wall Street Journal) and Bill Sammon (Washington Times), that when
the dust settles in November. Bush wins BIG.
I may be the 'Lone Ranger' but despite
the pollsters and pundits 'conventional wisdom', I have told my radio
audience, John Fund (Wall Street Journal) and Bill Sammon (Washington
Times), that when the dust settles in November. Bush wins BIG.