From today's LTTE section of the New York Times

[ceebeegee]

President Bush opposed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Then he supported it. President Bush opposed the creation of an independent 9/11 commission. Then he supported it.

During the election of 2000, Mr. Bush opposed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill, denounced nation-building and said gay marriage was an issue to be decided by the states. This was before he signed McCain-Feingold into law, invaded Iraq and called for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

It is time for the media to stop propagating the myth that John Kerry is a morally equivocal flip-flopper while excusing the president's reversals as mere political pragmatism.

And even better:

In "All Things to All People," David Brooks writes, "There were so many military men at the Democratic convention I almost expected John Kerry to mount the stage in full body armor and recite the war speech from 'Henry V.' "

That indeed would have looked foolish, not anything like landing on an aircraft carrier in a jump suit under a banner declaring "Mission Accomplished."

Beautiful.

And might I add, it looks especially foolish from a man who never actually, you know, fought for his country.

Comments

[mollyx.livejournal.com]

I just got an email form a friend of mine, talking about Kerry and his promise of bringing jobs back to America. Unfortunately, it states that Kerry and his wife are profitting from their factories in other countries, whereas Bush doesn't actually own any companies. It's an email suggesting that Kerry is being hypocritical in this statement since he and his wife make more profits with their outsourced factories since they moved them from the States.

I'm still not voting for Bush.

[jayspec.livejournal.com]

What "factories" are they referring to? I'll bet you dollars to donuts (or rather, ketchup) that they're referring to Heinz, over which Teresa Heniz Kerry has no executive authority, and only 4% ownership.

[minstrel70.livejournal.com]

Those are precisely the factories. I think the suggestion is that to take a principled stand on the issue of outsourcing, she ought perhaps to sell the 4% stake, and buy into a company that doesn't outsource (not that she's likely to find one anymore).

[minstrel70.livejournal.com]

I do find it spectacularly hypocritical of those on the Left, like the second writer, suddenly deciding that combat service is an important qualification for a Commander in Chief, since these are the same people who were so adamant that Bill Clinton's Vietnam evasion mattered not a bit. Come to think of it, even Bill Clinton, at the convention last week, seems to have come around.

Memo to John Kerry: We get it. You served in Vietnam. Thank you. Now what have you done since?

[ceebeegee.livejournal.com]

I think you're reading into what the second writer is saying--s/he is only responding to what David Brooks said in his Times piece, not affirming anything about the significance of military service.

In any case, IMO those on the left who are doing what you claim, are having some fun at the expense of those on the right who screamed nonstop about Clinton's lack of military service. It is pretty funny. Nice to see the tables so neatly turned, although of course all along it's been fun to poke Limbaugh about his hypocrisy WRT military service.

I have no problem with either military service or lack thereof, but if you avoided the draft, just admit it. Please don't think I assign the same level of sacrifice to the National Guard, or think that counts as anything like actually going to Vietnam. Just admit it: "I was scared--I didn't want to go to Vietnam for a cause in which I didn't believe, and possibly get killed or maimed. I had resources/connections the average draftee didn't have, and I utilized them." And those goes for both Clinton and Bush. What I find hypocritical is Bush's history of ducking military service while beating the drums and pretending he's some sort of hero to them (like the jumpsuit nonsense). Stop playing toy soldier, Bush. You never served. It's offensive.

And I think if you turn to Kerry's website, to which he referred voters in his speech, you can see what he's done since then.

[dje2004.livejournal.com]

And not just Bush either. There are so many pro-war Republicans who have managed to avoid military service that there was a term coined to describe them: chickenhawk. This list includes Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, "Scooter" Libby, Bill Bennet, Limabaugh, O'Reilly, and Richard Perle.

I personally don't view military service as a major issue, but since the Republicans made it a big issue during the Clinton campaign, and since they're very gung-ho when it comes to beating the war drum, I'm happy to see Kerry stick it to them.

Bush as Secret Agent

[psychowoof.livejournal.com]

As I was waiting to get my hair cut the other day, I picked up the latest copy of GQ. There's an article trying to claim that the reason there's no record of Bush's whereabouts during Vietnam is because he was working as a secret agent.

Um, yeah, whatever.

Re: Bush as Secret Agent

[ceebeegee.livejournal.com]

Are you fucking serious? Okay, that's hilarious. Can you just see Bush as Austin Powers?

Re: Bush as Secret Agent

[psychowoof.livejournal.com]

I am not kidding!

Go check it out (http://us.gq.com/features/).

Re: Bush as Secret Agent

[minstrel70.livejournal.com]

An amusing piece. Clearly intended as satire.

Re: Bush as Secret Agent

[psychowoof.livejournal.com]

That was my impression (and deep hope) - however, it is written too straightly. Also, given the intelligence level of many GQ readers, I think satire might be lost on them.

Re: Bush as Secret Agent

[minstrel70.livejournal.com]

It's hardly subtle, at least once you get past the first page. Then again, anyone dumb enough to believe it is probably too dumb to read much farther than the first page, so perhaps you have a point.