Kerry takes a good stance on the war on terror
From my weblog (shameless promotion: http://fireball1244.livejournal.com/):
After months of searching for a message and firing campaign staffers, John Kerry?s presidential bid has finally done something to make thoughtful Democrats stand up and take notice; Kerry has articulated the campaign?s first mature, workable vision of a progressive policy towards the Middle East.
Framing his position with opposition to the Bush strategy, Kerry has called for renewed diplomacy, positive engagement of moderate Muslims, and the confrontation of the real evil power of the Middle East: the terrorist-supporting state of Saudi Arabia. Kerry?s even admitted that more troops are needed in Iraq -- an absolutely true reality which is denied by both Bush, who wants to pull troops out to curry electoral favor next Fall, and other prominent Democrats, who don?t seem to care about the consequences of cutting and running from the Iraq imbroglio.
This is a bold move from Kerry, though one has to wonder if it?s too late. Well financed and well known, it?s too early to count Kerry out. But if Democratic voters have become addicted to the tasty, but unrealistic, red meat thrown to them by Dean regarding this issue, Kerry?s nuanced perspective may never gain the traction it deserves. And that?s lamentable, because this is exactly the sort of tact the Democrats should be following: criticizing Bush?s fumbled war on terror while simultaneously providing a positive vision for an alternative. Dean and other Democrats seem to stop at ?I don?t like the war,? without clearly stating what America should be doing. Because obviously we should be doing something, just not what Bush has done.
Absent an alternative aside from turning tail and running (which is specifically the strategy supported by left-wing fanatic Dennis Kucinich), the Democrats will have a hard sell in the pro-war areas of the country. Even voters who are behind the war on terror need not be out of reach of the Democrat candidate, if he can engage them with a reasonable strategy that?s both realistic and honorable. Kerry seems to be the first Democrat to be moving in this direction. Good for him.
If Kerry makes many more pronunciations such as this, I may switch from my tenuous support from Clark to firm support for Kerry. If Kerry can sell this mature, adult view to the electorate at large, he could pull the rug out from Dean in New Hampshire, and perhaps send the Doctor packing come February 3. if he can?t sell it, Dean?s still the man to beat.
After months of searching for a message and firing campaign staffers, John Kerry?s presidential bid has finally done something to make thoughtful Democrats stand up and take notice; Kerry has articulated the campaign?s first mature, workable vision of a progressive policy towards the Middle East.
Framing his position with opposition to the Bush strategy, Kerry has called for renewed diplomacy, positive engagement of moderate Muslims, and the confrontation of the real evil power of the Middle East: the terrorist-supporting state of Saudi Arabia. Kerry?s even admitted that more troops are needed in Iraq -- an absolutely true reality which is denied by both Bush, who wants to pull troops out to curry electoral favor next Fall, and other prominent Democrats, who don?t seem to care about the consequences of cutting and running from the Iraq imbroglio.
This is a bold move from Kerry, though one has to wonder if it?s too late. Well financed and well known, it?s too early to count Kerry out. But if Democratic voters have become addicted to the tasty, but unrealistic, red meat thrown to them by Dean regarding this issue, Kerry?s nuanced perspective may never gain the traction it deserves. And that?s lamentable, because this is exactly the sort of tact the Democrats should be following: criticizing Bush?s fumbled war on terror while simultaneously providing a positive vision for an alternative. Dean and other Democrats seem to stop at ?I don?t like the war,? without clearly stating what America should be doing. Because obviously we should be doing something, just not what Bush has done.
Absent an alternative aside from turning tail and running (which is specifically the strategy supported by left-wing fanatic Dennis Kucinich), the Democrats will have a hard sell in the pro-war areas of the country. Even voters who are behind the war on terror need not be out of reach of the Democrat candidate, if he can engage them with a reasonable strategy that?s both realistic and honorable. Kerry seems to be the first Democrat to be moving in this direction. Good for him.
If Kerry makes many more pronunciations such as this, I may switch from my tenuous support from Clark to firm support for Kerry. If Kerry can sell this mature, adult view to the electorate at large, he could pull the rug out from Dean in New Hampshire, and perhaps send the Doctor packing come February 3. if he can?t sell it, Dean?s still the man to beat.
Comments
Securing America at Home and Abroad
The Iraq Truth Center
Statements of Principles on the Middle East Process
Restoring American Leadership: A New Direction for American Foreign Policy
Cooperative Threat Reduction
Preventive War
Nuclear Weapons
Misplaced Priorities Have Our Nation Vulnerable
Homeland Security
But, more importantly, Democrats and Republicans alike should read this Common Sense for a New Century
I'm not a Kerry fan or anything, but I felt that the Fox guy needed to be slapped around a little.