September 30, 2004

Pre-Debate Reality Check

Tonight’s presidential “debate” is really just a joint press interview. John Kerry and George W. Bush will never actually debate anything. I expect the whole ordeal will be an hour-and-a-half long cringe-fest beamed into my living room. I imagine I’ll feel worse about this upcoming election than I do right now.

I can’t count myself a fan of either one of these mooks. Neither are particularly intelligent. And they’re both painfully inarticulate in different ways. (I am looking forward to the VP "debate." John Edwards and Dick Cheney clearly are intelligent and articulate.)

John Kerry’s supporters are going to say he won the debate no matter what. George W. Bush’s supporters will say he won the debate no matter what. (Isn’t that a brilliant prediction?)

If I “declare” one of them a winner it will be whoever gets a boost in the polls. That, I’d say, is the only kind of announcement that makes any sense. If Kerry polls better tomorrow than he has lately, there is no way anyone can convince me that Bush will have outperformed him. The reverse is true, too.

So, calling all partisans: Please spare us the predictable “my guy clearly won” essays and blog posts. You won’t convince anybody no matter how much fun your cheerleading may be. Just something to think about. Now spin away, my commentariat comrades…

Posted by Michael J. Totten at September 30, 2004 05:14 PM
Comments

"Cringe-fest" is right! I had hoped to see Howard Dean demolishing Bush with his relentless plain-speaking. But, alas, it was not to be. The Demo voters did not believe me when I predicted (with witnesses) that Iraq would be a total catastrophe by October. But I couldn't talk to many of them.

Posted by: g-lex at September 30, 2004 05:28 PM

Michael, it seems you feel the debate will be more-or-less a wash. I don't know. For some reason I think it's likely one or the other candidate is really going to crack up tonight. It just has that feel to it.

I don't normally write about hunches, and that's all this is. I guess I just wonder if anyone else gets the same feeling.

Posted by: Mark Poling at September 30, 2004 05:48 PM

Nader may get the biggest boost after tonight!

Posted by: spc67 at September 30, 2004 05:50 PM

So Mike doesn't give a crap? Wow, so sophisticated are these "centrists." Actually you are a dime a dozen. There a millions of Americans out shopping at the malls and sniffing clue who equally could give a crap about our democratic republic.

So pat yourself on the back mushhead non-partisans! You are so fair and balenced with your non-opinions!

Posted by: Not a Mushhead at September 30, 2004 05:50 PM

Hmmm. No meltdown. But then again, that's why I don't go to Atlantic City more often.

Posted by: Mark Pling at September 30, 2004 07:33 PM

Not a mushhead,

LOL ! funny.

John Kerry

Delivery A+
Substance C+

George Bush

Delivery B
Substance A

Posted by: David at September 30, 2004 07:37 PM

Kerry A/C Bush C-/A, delivery/substance.

For what it's worth. No surprises for me.

Posted by: TmjUtah at September 30, 2004 07:46 PM

Well you two are just partisans. Us non-partisan centrists give Kerry A++++ on hair. See hair is important. The issues are just stupid partisan BS. I asked a few people shopping at Old Navy what they thought...they agreed with Micheal and me that Kerry has better hair. He gets my vote.

Plus Bush said "mission accomplished" he also lied (but really didn't but did) and was AWOL (accordign to CBS) and will reinstate the draft. Plus he has better hair. Also Halliburton! Halliburton! Vietnam! Better hair.

Kerry A++++++++++++++++

Bushitler F--------------

Posted by: Mushhead at September 30, 2004 08:00 PM

Overall it was a wash. It'll be interesting to see polls this weekend.

Posted by: MB at September 30, 2004 08:02 PM

"Nader may get the biggest boost after tonight!

Posted by spc67 " LOL, but sadly true. Bush seemed pissed, but couldn't articulate. Kerry seemed glib, but an empty suit. Good Lord I wish we had some real choices, but I know I'll hold my nose and vote for Bush. I just can't trust Kerry.

Posted by: Dave at September 30, 2004 08:07 PM

Neither of them are great speakers. It was sort of painful to sit through. I certainly wouldn't give Kerry an A on delivery. It was average. I think we all know the President isn't a speaker. Moolahs? (Maybe he was making fun of them).

I don't think anybody is going to change their minds over tonite's performance.

The Conflicted, like MJT, will still be conflicted.

I do think its pretty obvious that Kerry's plans are pipe dreams. A summit on Iraq? Bilateral talks with North Korea? Get real. The President isn't offering anything new, not that I thought he would be.

I wonder how they're going to conduct the 'town hall' debate.

Posted by: Eric Blair at September 30, 2004 08:15 PM

Mr. Bush had a lecturn of a heavier grained (more manly) wood with an upward (optimistic) sweep. Mr. Kerry's was finer grained (effete) and downward (pessimistic). Bush wins on this alone!!!

Posted by: Virgil K. Saari at September 30, 2004 08:23 PM

I basically agree with David and TmjUtah. Basically a wash. I do think Kerry helped himself a bit, but that didn't take much. Overall neither Bush nor Kerry crashed and burned, but neither of them soared either. But Bush did a decent job of repeating the mantra : Stay The Course.

I also think it is now obvious that this election is going to hinge on ONE thing : IRAQ.

The chaos in Iraq will undoubtedly get worse in Iraq before the election, because the terrorists want to unseat Bush. But my gut feeling is that this will actually help Bush, because the undecided voters are probably not going to want to change horses in midstream in Iraq. If we had been bogged down in Iraq for 5 or more years with no end in sight, then it might be different. But that is not the case.

My prediction : the polls will narrow a bit in Kerry's favor over the next few weeks, then widen again just before the election, and Bush wins decisively.

Posted by: freeguy at September 30, 2004 08:35 PM

I think Kerry's weakness in this debate was the same weakness he had after the convention. Nobody can possibly know what he is going to do in Iraq and the broader war.

Are international summits going to win the war? Elinating bunker buster nukes? Passing global tests? WTF is that? Signing Kyoto? He keeps talking about his plan, but I defy anybody to explain what his plan is in any coherent way.

Posted by: HA at September 30, 2004 08:35 PM

In a sane world, a candidate who wasn't able to string together a coherent sentence that hadn't been scripted would be laughed out of the election.

But there you go ...

Posted by: Mork at September 30, 2004 08:37 PM

I havent read any one elses opinion of the debate but this is what I personally thought about it..No winners! I thought it was pretty much a wash..Unfortunately...

I became bored during alot of it and while I think on this debate they ended up even I have to say, I expected more from Bush and less from Kerry.

Posted by: Cathy at September 30, 2004 08:39 PM

HA,

I agree, and that is Kerry's ( and much of the Democrat Party's ) problem. Too many - probably most - Democrats today simply do not believe in America's indispensable role to promote freedom in the world. They see America not as middle America sees us, but rather as much of Europe sees us : a global bully that needs to be tamed by the UN.

Kerry message is basically that we should defer,defer,defer. Defer to the UN on security, global warming, etc. The same UN which is now acting so decisively to end the genocide in Sudan. LOL

Such people should not be in charge of this nation's defense and foreign policy, especially not now.

Posted by: freeguy at September 30, 2004 08:44 PM

HA, I ask you this: what's Bush's plan? What goals has he set for his next term? I haven't heard any except for that fuzzy goal of "spreading freedom". Yeah, nice idea, but I need details. At least Kerry offered something. Whether you agree with it or not, at least he has something of a plan. Who knows whether summits will help the war on terror? Iraq didn't.

Kerry never said that Kyoto would help the war. Kerry never said that eliminating bunker busting nuclear bomb programs would help the war. Kerry's talking about how the world sees us, and how we should lead by setting an example, by being that "city on the hill" that the forefathers wanted us to be. Just because you participate in the larger world community doesn't mean you're a wimp.

I'm still leaning towards Kerry. One thing that I noticed, though. In their closing arguments about foreign policy, Kerry talked about working with our allies, forging stronger bonds with our friends, and leading by example. What did President Bush talk about? Weapons, military might, troops, and missile defense. That really tells a lot to me.

Posted by: Greg at September 30, 2004 08:48 PM

oh, and as far as score for style/substance:

Kerry B/A
Bush C/B

Bush looked confused in the last half and would ask for 30 seconds then would waste 10 seconds of that just sitting there trying to think of what to say, going "uh, I just want to, uh", giving that smirk that i hate, doing that half laugh thing he does.

Posted by: Greg at September 30, 2004 08:51 PM

Dammit, and I keep forgetting something. Someone said Nader won tonight. I don't think so. Either Fox or NBC (don't remember) had a quick poll after the debate, though I don't know how accurate it is, and it showed both Kerry's and Bush's percentages going up by one and Nader's dropping down below 1%.

Posted by: Greg at September 30, 2004 08:54 PM

Let's begin by agreeing that both Bush and Kerry were quite repetitive. Nothing new was learned tonight.

Kerry is desperately trying to be viewed as being more consistent. While more articulate in his use of words, Kerry was less than substantive. Can you clearly say what his plan is on Iraq other than asserting he would do a better job of executing what is already being done? The "how" is missing.

And he continued to contradict himself - in particular, by saying Saddam was in fact a threat at the end of the debate after saying the entire debate that Saddam was not a threat. His "let's subject United States foreign policy to the UN" (my phrase) came through loud and clear with his "we have to pass the global test" comment.

Let's face it, his plans for Iraq and the war against radical Islamists remain fuzzy or unrealistic. If he get elected, does he really think the rest of the world is going to line up behind him and come to the rescue in Iraq (or anywhere else)? A summit on Iraq or bilateral talks with North Korea are at best entertaining ideas. This all sounds like a policy of appeasementment to me. Neville Chamberlain declared there would be peace in our time in 1938 (if I am not mistaken). It didn't work then and it won't work now.

Bush was predictably simple and straightforward. I believe he is sincere when he says that his first priority is to try to keep America safe. He has never wavered from this position. I do not think that his execution on this front both domestically or internationally has been perfect or is what I would have done (spoken as an arm chair quarterback). I have managed a company with several hundred employees and change is a difficult thing to implement.

Consequently, I don't think Kerry changed many minds tonight because he still does not know his own mind. Bush will continue to hated by the left, but the American people are likely to believe that their interests and the interests of America will be best served through his leadership.

Now comes the real test. Who will win the post-debate debate?

Posted by: BDB at September 30, 2004 09:13 PM

My take (for whatever it's worth)

Tonight was equally unimpressive performance for both candidates. That said, Kerry won. Why? Because he had a much easier job to do.

Let's accept for the moment that everyone who was going into the debates sure they were going to vote for Bush is still going to vote for Bush, and everyone who was going into the debates sure they were going to vote for Kerry is still going to vote for Kerry. They're not really what this debate was about, now were they?

The goal of this debate for President Bush was to convince the undecided voters that Kerry is so unacceptable an option that they would rather stick with the known flawed leadership than give Kerry the power to screw things up further. Given the poll numbers, that's a rather steep struggle. A majority are quite disenchanted with Iraq, and it will take a strong negative image of the challenger to confront that attitude that we shouldn't tempt fate by changing horses in midstream. Thus far, the swift boat ads and the constant "flip=flopper" mantra have been amazingly effective and painting that exact picture, but Bush really needed to trounce Kerry on substantive points in order to press that image. For Kerry, all that was necessary was to give the impression that he understood the task at hand. The caricature of Kerry that the Bush campaign has decided to go with is of a candidate who doesn't fully understand the war on terror and thus can't be trusted to do anything about it. Kerry simply had to show a command of -- no, actually merely a familiarity with -- the issues, to come out ahead.

More importantly, it was Kerry rather than Bush who raised the numerous security issues that exist outside of Iraq, giving the impression that Bush was overly focused on Iraq at the expense of other imortant concerns. Kerry needed to raise the issue of containing nuclear materials before Bush did, and he did so. He needed to talk about first responders and port security before Bush did, and he did so. He needed to bring up North Korea before Bush did, and he did so. Bush clearly had his responses to these issues prepared, but by allowing Kerry to raise the issues, he let himself be corralled into responding rather than taking the initiative, and that isn't where Bush wanted to be tonight.

Just my two cents, which will be immediately ignored by partisans of the right and embraced by partisans of the left. Sigh... why do we even bother anymore....

Posted by: Jeremy at September 30, 2004 09:21 PM

Mork -

I was impressed by Bush's response to Kerry's presentation on Korea - especially where he corrected Kerry on the timeline and the materials involved. And on the utility of the six-party method - we stopped construction of the Nork's reactor, we don't send them fuel, and we stopped sending food. We have no leverage left beyond our willingness to blockade or worse; the Norks can indeed "walk away from the table" the second this becomes a bilateral issue. The neighbors of NK, especially China, all continue to contribute aid in food, fuel, or trade, and most important, live right next to the whackjobs. They have immediate and vested interests in seeing a workable solution. To arbitrarily agree to bilateral talks would be ludicrous. Kerry knows it, too.

Kerry returned to his nuclear freeze days and multiculti orthodoxy with his statements on bunker busters. I don't care as much about how MANY nations have WMD's - it's which ones constitute threats to us that we must pay attention to. Having weapons isn't evil. Using them for evil - that's the problem.

A nuke in a Seawolf on patrol does not equal a nuke in the parlor of a Kim Jong Il reception or on a missile in the hills of Iran or in a shipping container bound for Los Angeles. Not in the real world. And Kerry probably did himself more harm than good (the goal was to pick up undecideds, right?) by declaring his posture on nukes in general and by intending to abandon research into bunker busters. Someday in the not too distant future we may find ourselves in dire need of a tool to crack a site invulnerable to land or conventional air attack; a launch or storage site that we cannot afford not to destroy. Better to drill it with one or more advanced design/high efficiency weapons than to have to apologize for two or three groundbursts with megaton weapons.

Outlandish? I am unable to imagine exactly what situation could compel us to use such weapons, and I'm pretty well-read on the possibilities that may exist. What I DO know is that both Korea and Iran have had decades to harden their highest-value facilities and that they did so specifically to counter our ability to interfere with their strategic programs. Kerry's statements on nukes may or may not sell in Peoria but there had to be modest amounts of confetti in Pyongyang and select caves in the Kush.

There may well be people who could be swayed by Kerry's performance this evening. Anybody else who is even remotely familiar with the candidates and their positions before 7PM MDST tonight didn't find much grounds for change.

Posted by: TmjUtah at September 30, 2004 09:26 PM

Okay, I'm not exactly a raging liberal and I'd be the first to say that Kerry kicked Bush's ass tonight. On substance. On style. On smarts. On likeability. On coherence, most of all.

I think Kerry was at his absolute best and I can't recall seeing Bush look any worse. I mean, come on, EVEN DAVID GAVE KERRY A "B+" AVERAGE!!! If that doesn't speak volumes I don't know what does.

Wasn't this supposed to be Bush's debate? The debate over foreign policy. Wasn't he up by like 30 points in all the polls, here? It'll be really interesting to see how this all turns out. The townhall is a big wild-card, I think. But, needless to say, I'll be pretty shocked if Kerry doesn't get quite a boost from Round One, tonight.

Posted by: Grant McEntire at September 30, 2004 09:41 PM

Grant,

Kerry, coherent ? HA.

All I can say is that if "undecided" voters are so stupid that because Kerry appeared somewhat more coherent tonight on TV that they now believe that a "change" to more coherence in the 4 weeks prior to an election trump 20+ years of a John Kerry who twists and turns with every change of the wind ( as in wind surfing ), then I am ready to agree with the people who say that universal suffrage is a very very bad idea.

Posted by: freeguy at September 30, 2004 10:19 PM

Well, I guess Michael's prediction is wrong.

Dems are claiming that Kerry kicked ass.

Reps are claiming it was a tie.

That should tell you all you need to know. Hell, even the FoxNews crowd gave it marginally to Kerry.

Though it wasnt a knockout, it might have a huge impact. The only thing keeping Bush a few points ahead has been his large lead on leadership, WoT, and Iraq. No way that those leads can survive tonight. Even if it was a draw, that would tend to close the gap on these issues. But with a clear (though not large) Kerry win, Bush is in real trouble.
I also think it was a stupid gamble on the part of the Bushies to want the foreign policy debate first. Clearly they were hoping for a knockout punch - but all they managed to do was undercut their own foundation. IF this had been the economy debate, far fewer people would have been paying attention, and Kerry would have had a hard time getting traction. Now I suspect the Bushies are dreading moving onto Kerry's turf.

All in all, very good night for my side.

Posted by: Tano at September 30, 2004 10:31 PM

Tano, did you and I watch the same debate? Noone kicked anyones ass! If the democrats are saying that then that is just more of their wishful thinking. It was even. NO WINNER! The most I can say is that Kerry did better than I thought he would do. Doesn't mean he won, it just means he didn't make an ass of himself. I'm certain that Kerry supporters are elated at that alone.

Posted by: Cathy at September 30, 2004 11:39 PM

Tony Blair would have blown these guys out of the water. From his hospital bed. While doped up on pain killers. After 1/2 hour, I was ready to scream from hearing little more than one talking point after another. I would give Kerry the win for being a little more clear, articulate and presidential sounding. He was still somewhat his pedantic self, but avoided his usual wonkishness. Bush seemed a little too nervous and came close to some Gore-esque huffing. But as much as I don't care for Bush, I continue to fear more and more for what will happen to the Iraqi people if Kerry wins the election. That is more important than anything else, and leaves me less and less likely to write in Tony Blair.

Posted by: YetAnotherRick at October 1, 2004 12:28 AM

CATHY...

So Kerry did better than you thought he would do, aye? In the realm of presidential politics, that's what matters the most. In essence, that in and of itself is a win.

I think you could make a pretty strong argument that Bush never actually KICKED ASS in any of his debates against Al Gore. But he did do better than most people thought he would.

Okay, here's a good way to look at this. In football, teams are favored and handicapped on gameday. Bush was, by virtue of being 20-30 points ahead in all the polls concerning the WoT and Iraq, a heavy favorite coming into this debate. That gives John Kerry a pretty large handicap. Well, the early concensus at this point is that John Kerry actually won the debate.

So, if John Kerry was a football team, tonight his opponent was favored by 13 points. And John Kerry actually won the game outright by a field goal. When you add in the handicap, he so overachieved that it looks like a blowout and that he won BIG.

Posted by: Grant McEntire at October 1, 2004 12:35 AM

"There was a chance that the President would knock Kerry out of the race tonight...I think Kerry survived and I think he did pretty well tonight. Kerry was forceful and articulate...He did a pretty good job of making the case that the invasion of Iraq was wrong."

-William Kristol

Posted by: Grant McEntire at October 1, 2004 12:47 AM

Grant, I'm a Bush supporter and no amount of Debates will change that. I support Bush for reasons that you probably can't even understand .

My saying that Kerry did better than I thought he would is NOT a win for Kerry. I expected him to make an ass of himself, he didn't, I'm big enough to admit that. Not making an ass of oneself is not the same as winning. So, there were no asses at the debate tonight and noone got their asses kicked at the debate.

I said it before and I say it again; IT WAS A WASH!

Posted by: Cathy at October 1, 2004 01:27 AM

I said it before and I say it again; IT WAS A WASH!

Well, I'll only say it once, but's that's wishful thinking.

Posted by: Mork at October 1, 2004 02:22 AM

"reasons that you probably can't even understand"...

Am I take that as a dig on my intelligence?

Or my age?

Or what exactly? I'm just curious.

Posted by: Grant McEntire at October 1, 2004 02:55 AM

Grant, NO, that remark was not meant as anything at all against you personally..I meant I have my own personal reasons why I want Bush to remain President. And, since alot of those reasons are personal, I wouldn't expect anyone to understand them..Besides, I have no idea of your age or intelligence level..

Posted by: Cathy at October 1, 2004 03:35 AM

Greg,

least Kerry offered something.

Besides criticism, what did he offer that Bush isn't already doing? The only thing I could glean is that by making concessions and "passing global tests" in other arenas - Kyoto, bunker busters, ICC, etc. - that unamed foreign allies with phantom armies will come to our aid. The notion is ludicrous.

This debate re-affirmed everything I despise about the Democrats and John Kerry. They were virtually silent during the debate to go to war, they mostly voted for the war, but since the primary campaign, they have run against it. They made a deliberate decision that to beat Bush they had to undermine the war in Iraq. It is absolutely disgraceful.

And they are setting themselves up for a terrible trap. If Kerry wins, the Democrats will have successfully undermined the war. It will be politically impossible for them to stay the course. Kerry he has a plan to win the election, but no plan to win the war. And his plan to win the election makes winning the war impossible. He will not be able to maintain political support for the war. The isolationist right will start speaking in unison with the pacifist left. Supporters will fall silent. Make no mistake, by electing Kerry, America will be repudiating the war itself. Political support will disappear and he will cut and run.

The Democratic position is that by overthrowing Saddam, we are creating more terrorists than we are killing. For Kerry to win, America will have to buy that canard. But if you assert that this canard is true, won't it still be true if Kerry picks up the flag and carries on the fight? If the Democratic canard is true, then isn't the war a mistake? Can John Kerry of all people ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?

No. He can't. And everybody knows that anything John Kerry says is worthless. He was against cutting and running before he was for it.

John Kerry will be a disaster. Our enemies won't fear him and our allies won't trust him. He is weak, he will be tested and he will fail. He will treat terrorism as a crime problem rather than an act of war, which is the failed policy that got us into this mess. He will be tested by Al Qaeda. He will be tested by Iran. He will tested by Syria. He will be tested by the Norks. And he will be tested by China. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia will stop cooperating. Libya will restart their nuke program. France and Germany will continue stabbing us in the back. Blair will lose his election. Our allies on the ground in Iraq will rush for the exists rather than being the last ones out. There will be an accelerating downward spiral into catastrophe. A perfect catastrophe. It will make the disaster that followed our collapse in Vietnam look like a picnic.

Don't say you weren't warned.

Posted by: HA at October 1, 2004 04:06 AM

One more thing. Why is John Kerry planning to give nuclear material to Iran? I thought he was against nuclear proliferation. Oh, that was before he was for it.

Posted by: HA at October 1, 2004 04:24 AM

Great commentary from Charles Krauthammer on the perfect trap John Kerry has set for himself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63792-2004Sep30.html

John Kerry is the new Nixon.

Posted by: HA at October 1, 2004 04:41 AM

HA - you should calm down, dude. I know you had a bad night, but I can smell the flop-sweat through my screen.

Posted by: Mork at October 1, 2004 05:03 AM

Hey Dork,

When people start dissecting the transcripts, Kerry is going to start to look much worse than he did last night.

Giving nuclear fuel to the Iranians? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Posted by: Eric Blair at October 1, 2004 05:41 AM

In a sane world, a candidate who wasn't able to string together a coherent sentence that hadn't been scripted would be laughed out of the election.

Moses had a speech impediment, that's why he had to speak through his right-hand man Aaron; and Moses lead the Hebrews to freedom.

Posted by: David at October 1, 2004 06:55 AM

John Kerry lied:

The KGB is not located in Treblinka Square. Treblinka was a death camp in Poland.

The NYCity subway did NOT shut down during the GOP convention.

Posted by: David at October 1, 2004 06:58 AM

I mean, come on, EVEN DAVID GAVE KERRY A "B+" AVERAGE!!! If that doesn't speak volumes I don't know what does.

Grant,

don't get your hopes up. Kerry doesn't get a "B+" if you consider that style doesn't get weighed in my grading scale nearly as heavily as subtance does. Kerry gets about a B- , and that's only because he's such a stellar communicator.

Posted by: David at October 1, 2004 07:04 AM

David,

Moses also called down 10 plagues on the egyptians, split the red sea, turned his staff into a snake, brought water from a rock, and a host of other miracles.

Bush hasn't pulled off even a good card trick yet ;-).

Tosk

Posted by: D Clyde at October 1, 2004 10:40 AM

On Kerry's position...

Once (and only once) I heard the most forthright and honest answer from Kerry that I've ever heard from a politican. In his NPR interview, he was asked about what he was going to do in January if President.

His response was simply that while he had ideas about what he would Like to do, he would have to wait until January, when he had full access to the intel and saw what unfolded over the next few months.

How smart, wait until you KNOW what is going on, before you come up with a solution.

Unfortunately, I haven't heard such intelligent comments from him since.

Tosk

Posted by: D Clyde at October 1, 2004 10:43 AM

C'mon, HA. I know you're not that stupid that you actually believe that tripe you said. You don't know the difference between nuclear fuel and nuclear weapons? There's a big difference between proliferation and creating energy.

Do you really think that Blair will lose his election because Kerry wins? That's hard to prove. If anything, Blair will lose because he's honest about Iraq being a mistake.

Libya won't restart their nuke program just because Kerry's in power. That's ridiculous. If anything, Bush's policies will do that. Why? Because North Korea and Iran have shown that the only way to get Bush's attention is to threaten proliferation. Either that, or try to kill his dad.

My theory is that if Bush is re-elected, then Iraq will go down like Vietnam did, only worse. Why? Because Bush refuses to acknowledge that things aren't rosy over there and that the administration has made some mistakes (and saying "I've made tough decisions" isn't doing that). Making tough decisions won't work if you make the wrong one.

Remember - Dick Cheney was against deposing Saddam before he was for it. See his comments as Sec. of Defense after the first Gulf War. He actually predicted then what's happening now.

Whether Kerry "picks up the flag" - interesting choice of words there, btw, implying that Bush has dropped it - has no bearing on the fact that invading Iraq did in fact bring more terrorists into that country. Even I know that invading a country brings anarchy for a while after victory is acheived, and the administration didn't plan for that. Kerry would have to go in there and clean up the mess that was left for him.

Oh, and btw, even though I am marginally on the left, I am not a pacifist. However, I believe that, like Kerry, Iraq is not a war we should be fighting. Containment was working. If it didn't, as some on the right like to assert, what happened to the WMDs?

Bush was for the WMD excuse before he was for the "world is better without saddam" excuse.

I will say one thing bad about kerry - he forgot about Poland.

Posted by: Greg at October 1, 2004 11:10 AM

Greg,

You don't know the difference between nuclear fuel and nuclear weapons? There's a big difference between proliferation and creating energy.

You've heard of dirty nukes haven't you? A dirty nuke in downtown Manhattan would have a devastating economic impact.

Do you really think that Blair will lose his election because Kerry wins?

Yes. Blair is already fighting for his life. If Bush goes down, Blair goes down. If Blair goes down, the Brits walk.

Because North Korea and Iran have shown that the only way to get Bush's attention is to threaten proliferation.

NK and Iran began their nuclear programs long before Bush was President.

Whether Kerry "picks up the flag" - interesting choice of words there, btw, implying that Bush has dropped it

No, I'm implying that if Kerry wins, he will have slain the King. Will Kerry pick up the Kings flag and carry on the King's fight? I don't think so.

However, I believe that, like Kerry, Iraq is not a war we should be fighting. Containment was working. If it didn't, as some on the right like to assert, what happened to the WMDs?

Containment was broken. France, Russia and China were trying to to get sanctions lifted. Remember "Smart Sanctions?" The Oil for Food program was getting skimmed by Saddam to the tune of $10 billion with the full knowledge of Kofi Annan and the full participation of Annan's son. And Saddam was funelling 100's of millions of dollars of Oil for Food contracts to Al Qaeda front groups.

Posted by: Ha at October 1, 2004 06:48 PM

HA...

I don't really think Blair is toast if Bush goes down. He might already be toast anyway, which is a shame given the way I worship his politics and persona and all, but he's not just Bush's pet. He's not even a conservative, remember? Blair and Kerry probably sharply disagree on whether or not the War in Iraq was a good idea in the first place, but I think Blair is much closer to Kerry when it comes to winning the peace than he is Bush. When it comes to multilateral nation-building, Kerry and Blair are VERY much on the same page.

If Kerry were to win and launch his big world-summit idea, Blair would probably be his #1 supporter in trying to bring the other European countries along. Everybody talks about how closely tied Bush and Blair are. Well, he used to be that closely tied to Clinton too! He works with what he's got, that much is clear. He finds positions he agrees upon with American Presidents and works to further them, internationally.

As for Blair losing his job between now and then, I don't think there's anyone up to the task of challenging him. The British are getting mighty fed up with Blair, but they still hate the Tories even more. And I don't think the Lib-Dems could pull it off yet, either. The challenge would have to come from within his own party and I just don't see that happening.

Posted by: Grant McEntire at October 1, 2004 07:21 PM

Grant,

The challenge would have to come from within his own party and I just don't see that happening.

Why not? It happened to Thatcher.

Posted by: HA at October 1, 2004 07:29 PM

Grant,

Here's some info on the Labour leadership battle:

http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/13530144?source=Evening%20Standard

Posted by: HA at October 2, 2004 04:20 AM

Weiner's Law of Libraries:
There are no answers, only cross references.

Posted by: Party Poker at November 4, 2004 01:22 AM

You should enter the most inspiring and resourceful
online poker site on the web! We
are happy to present you with the most informative piece of data you can find on
the online poker. The best of online poker tips, online pokers tournaments,
online poker
strategy
, online poker games,
online poker rules.
To satisfy your curiosity, click on the online
online poker news,
and if you wish to download online poker game, please do so http://www.online---poker.us !

Posted by: online poker at November 11, 2004 03:04 PM

This is the perfect chance for you to finacial
cash advance dollars for you loan
payday advance money here.

Posted by: cash advance at November 23, 2004 03:55 PM

Order Skelaxin online cheap now
at http://www.skelaxin-online.net/

Posted by: Skelaxin at November 25, 2004 07:08 AM

Order Skelaxin online cheap now
at http://www.skelaxin-online.net/

Posted by: Skelaxin at November 25, 2004 10:37 AM

It was the next morning that the armies of Twodor marched east
laden with long lances, sharp swords, and death-dealing hangovers. The
thousands were led by Arrowroot, who sat limply in his sidesaddle,
nursing a whopper. Goodgulf, Gimlet, and the rest rode by him, praying
for their fate to be quick, painless, and if possible, someone else's.
Many an hour the armies forged ahead, the war-merinos bleating
under their heavy burdens and the soldiers bleating under their melting
icepacks.
-- The Harvard Lampoon, Bored of the Rings
Payday Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Payday Loan at December 16, 2004 08:53 AM

A New York City ordinance prohibits the shooting of rabbits from the
rear of a Third Avenue street car -- if the car is in motion.
Payday Loans http://www.paylesspaydayloans.com

Posted by: Payday Loans at December 17, 2004 05:35 AM

ture

Posted by: cruelfamily at December 19, 2004 11:42 AM

test from september archive

Posted by: Anthony Perez-Miller at December 22, 2004 11:21 AM

69 * afrodyzjak * afrodyzjaki * agencja towarzyska * agencje modelek * agencje towarzyskie * akcesoria erotyczne * aktorki * akty * alfons * amatorki * amatorski * amatorskie filmy * amatorskie filmy porno * amatorskie filmy porno sex filmy * amerykanki * anal * analny anlanie * analny seks * analny sex * artykuly erotyczne * azjatki * bara-bara * bdsm * bielizna * bielizna latex lack skora * bisty * biura matrymonialne * biuro matrymonialne * biust * biustonosz * biustonosze * biusty * blogi erotyczne * blona dziewicza * blond dziewczyny * blondynki * boys * britney spears * brodawka * brodawki * brunetki * burdel * burdele * chlopcy * chuj * chuje * cipcie * cipeczki * cipki * cipy * cnota * cnotka * cnotki * cyce * cycki * cycuszki * czarnulki * czasopisma erotyczne * czekoladki * czlonek * czlonek naturalny z wibratorem * czlonki * darmowe akty * darmowe filmy porno * darmowe galerie porno * darmowe zdjecia * darmowy seks * darmowy sex * dewiacje * dewiant * dojrzale * domowy seks grupowy * dupczenie * dupeczki * dupy * duze biusty * duze penisy * duze piersi * dymane * dymanie * dyze cyce * dziewczeta * dziewczyny * dziewice * dziurkowanie * dziwka * dziwki * erekcja * erotyczne * erotyczne filmy rysunkowe * erotyczne inicjacje * erotyczne sex zabawy * erotyczny * erotyka * exstaza * exstazy * feromony * fetysz * fetysze * figi * filmy * filmy erotyczne * filmy porno * filmy porno gay * filmy porno na cd * filmy porno na dvd * filmy porno na vcd * filmy porno na vhs * filmy pornograficzne na dvd vcd cd vhs * filmy prywatne * filmy z nastolatkami * fiut * fiutki * fiuty * foczki * foki * fotki * fuck * galeria erotyczna * galerie erotyczne * gawlt * gay * gazety porno pornograficzne erotyczne * gej * geje * giga mega wielki penis * girls * gry erotyczne * guma ogumienie prezerwatywa prezerwatywy kondom * gwalcenie * gwalt * gwalty * gwiazdy porno * hardcore * hardcore seks * hardcore sex * hentai * homoseksualisci * homoseksualistki * homoseksualny * huj * huje * jak powiakszyc penisa * jebac * jebanie * kamasutra sex pozycje pozycje milosne * kobiety * kociaki * kurewski * kurewskie * kurwa * kurwy * kutas * kutasy * lachociagi * lale * lalunie * laseczki * laski * lastwe panienki * lateks * latex * latwe laski * lechtaczka * lechtaczki * lesbian sex lesbijki filmy porno * lesbijki * lesby * lezbijki * licealistki * lolitki * magazyny porno pornograficzne erotyczne * majteczki * male biusty * male penisy * malolaty * maly biust * marszczenie freda * masturbacja * mlode * mlode laski * mniejszosci seksualne * mocna erotyka * modelki * molestowanie seksualne * murzynki * nagie polki * nagie znane kobiety * nasadka na penis * nasienie * nastolatki * nastoletnie * naturyzm * niemki * niewinne * night cluby * nimfomanka * nimfomanki * obciaganie * obciagary * obciagnij mi * odjazd * ogloszenia matrymonialne * ogloszenia towarzyskie * onanizm * onanizowanie * opowiadania erotyczne * opowiesci erotyczne * orgazm * orgia * orgie * palcowanie * palcowka * pamela anderson * panie z nadwaga * panienki * panny * pedaly * penis * penisy * perwersja * pieprzenie * pierdolenie * pierdolic * piersi * pindy * pissing * pizda * pizdeczka * pizdy * platne filmy erotyczne * playboy * playboy modelki * podniecajace * podnieta * poezja milosna erotyki * polki * polki nago * ponczochy rajstopy * porno * pornografia * powieksz swojego penisa * powiekszanie penisa * pozycje milosne * prezerwatywy * prostytucja * prostytutka * prostytutki * prywatne ogloszenia towarzyskie * randka * randki * ranking i katalog stron * ranking i katalog stron erotycznych * robienie laski * robienie load * robienie loda * rosjanki * rozdziewiczanie * rozrywka * ruchane * ruchanie * ruchawice * rude * rypanie * rzniecie * samice * seks * seks anime * seks chat * seks czat * seks grupowy * seks hentai * seks-kamery * seksowna bielizna * seks-porady * serwisy erotyczne * sex * sex amatorski po polsku * sex anal * sex analny * sex analny sex oralny oral anal * sex anime * sex anonse towarzyskie * sex chat * sex czat * sex czat erotyczny * sex grupowy * sex manga * sex opowiadania erotyczne * sex oral * sex oralny oral * sex tapety * sex video vhs dvd cd * sexowna bielizna * sexplaneta * sex-shop sex filmy porno akcesoria erotyczne * sms * sperma * sperma erekcja orgazm wytrysk * striptease taniec erotyczny * strony erotyczne * studentki * suczki * sutek * sutki * szarpanie dzidy * szatynki * szmata * szmaty * szparka * szparki * tanie prezerwatywy * tapety erotyczne * tapety na pulpit * tapety porno * tirowka * tirowki * towarzyskie * tranwestyci * tranzwestyci * ukrainki * uzaleznienie od seksu * uzaleznienie od sexu * vagina * walenie kapucyna * walenie konia * walenie nastolatek * wargi sromowe * wenera * wibrator * wibrator fajna zabaweczka * wibrator wibratory wibra * wibratory * wielkie cyce * wielkie piersi * wszystko o sexie * wydluz penisa * wydluz swojego penisa * wydymane * wygolone * wyruchane * wytrysk * wyuzdane * wzmacnianie penisa * wzmocnij swojego penisa * xxx * zarosniete * zboczeni * zboczenia * zboczenie * zboczona * zboczone * zboczony * zdjecia * zdjecia erotyczne * zdjecia porno * zdjecia z nastolatkami * znane nago * zrob mi laske * zrob mi loda * zruchane

Posted by: Niki at May 23, 2005 08:12 PM
cool blog - thanks for the service

online casino

Posted by: casino at June 29, 2005 01:08 AM

20 latki w ciazy wyrosniete @ 20 latki w ciazy za forse @ 20 latki w ciazy za kase @ 20 latki w ciazy za pieniadze @ 20 latki w ciazy zgabnie @ 20 latki w ciazy zgrabne @ 20 latki w cipe @ 20 latki w cipke @ 20 latki w dupe @ 20 latki w dziurke @ 20 latki w kakao @ 20 latki w pupe @ 20 latki w szparke @ 20 latki walenie gruchy @ 20 latki walenie gruchy 2 pary @ 20 latki walenie gruchy 2pary @ 20 latki walenie gruchy brutalnie @ 20 latki walenie gruchy cycate @ 20 latki walenie gruchy darmo @ 20 latki walenie gruchy doswiadczone @ 20 latki walenie gruchy fetysz @ 20 latki walenie gruchy fetyszystki @ 20 latki walenie gruchy forsa @ 20 latki walenie gruchy free @ 20 latki walenie gruchy grupowo @ 20 latki walenie gruchy latwo @ 20 latki walenie gruchy lesbijki @ 20 latki walenie gruchy lesby @ 20 latki walenie gruchy lezbijki @ 20 latki walenie gruchy lezby @ 20 latki walenie gruchy na zywo @ 20 latki walenie gruchy nietrzezwe @ 20 latki walenie gruchy niewolnice sexualne @ 20 latki walenie gruchy od tylu @ 20 latki walenie gruchy odurzone @ 20 latki walenie gruchy ostro @ 20 latki walenie gruchy ostry @ 20 latki walenie gruchy pieniadze @ 20 latki walenie gruchy pijane @ 20 latki walenie gruchy pizda @ 20 latki walenie gruchy pizdy @ 20 latki walenie gruchy podryw @ 20 latki walenie gruchy podrywacze @ 20 latki walenie gruchy podwiazki @ 20 latki walenie gruchy podwojnie @ 20 latki walenie gruchy przerosniete @ 20 latki walenie gruchy przystojne @ 20 latki walenie gruchy przystojny @ 20 latki walenie gruchy rajstopy @ 20 latki walenie gruchy rozjebane

Posted by: Matti at July 5, 2005 01:09 AM

Great Site

Posted by: Sign My GuestBook at August 22, 2005 06:35 AM

Hi I have been given the task of getting links for our websites thathave good page rank on the links directories.In addition we have many categories so your site will be place on an appropriate page. If you would like to trade links please send me your website details.Best Regards,seopro@walla.com
http://www2w.bravehost.com vs the best casino http://casino.vmedical.us new online casino
casinos
casino
online poker
online gambling
online casinos
online casinos
online casinos
online poker
online casinos
online casino
casino
poker
casino
casino
casinos
online casino
online gambling
casino
poker
neteller casinos
online casino
online poker
online casino
internet poker
free online poker
texas holdem poker
poker
online slots
online roulette
online blackjack
poker
online casinos
online casino
online casino
online roulette
online poker
internet casinos
online slots
online blackjack

Posted by: online casinos at October 9, 2005 06:55 AM

very nice site. Lodówki, ladna stronka, ciekawa informacja, katalog, katalog spis

Posted by: Telewizory lcd at December 3, 2005 02:46 AM

very nice site. Lodówki, ladna stronka, ciekawa informacja, katalog, katalog spis

Posted by: Telewizory lcd at December 3, 2005 02:46 AM

plesce send movie

Posted by: voroojak at December 5, 2005 07:54 AM

plesce send movie irany

Posted by: voroojak at December 5, 2005 07:55 AM

liming 07年09月10日
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power level
wow power level
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
warcraft gold
warcraft gold
BUY VIAGRA
BUY VIAGRA
rolex replica
rolex replica
beijing hotels
beijing hotels
shanghai hotels
shanghai hotels
china tour
china tour
hong kong hotel
hong kong hotel
beijing tour
beijing tour
北京律师
北京律师
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
搬家公司
在职研究生
营养师
营养师培训
喷码机
铸造模拟软件
激光快速成型机
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
飘零月
飘零月
rolex replica

google排名
google排名
great wall
beijing travel
beijing
beijing
china tour
china tour
翻译公司
翻译公司
保洁
保洁
保洁公司
保洁公司
光盘刻录
光盘刻录
光盘制作
光盘制作
光盘印刷
光盘印刷
猎头
猎头
货架
搬家公司
搬家公司
北京搬家
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司
搬家
搬家公司
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司
搬家公司
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司
google排名
google排名
监控
监控

激光打标机
软件工程硕士
集团电话
集团电话
激光打标机
激光打标机
打包机
打包机
拓展训练
塑钢门窗
网站设计
机票
机票
网站建设
数据采集卡
美国国家大学
在职研究生
呼叫中心
交换机
激光打标机
激光打标机
磁控溅射台
磁控溅射台
淀积台
淀积台
镀膜机
镀膜机
匀胶机
匀胶机
宠物托运
宠物托运
溅射仪
溅射仪
刻蚀机
刻蚀机
pecvd
pecvd
匀胶机
匀胶机

Posted by: 优化男儿 at September 11, 2007 12:01 AM

货架
货架
货架
货架
货架
货架公司
货架公司
货架公司
货架厂
仓储货架
仓储货架
仓储货架
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
仓储笼
钢托盘
堆垛架
钢制料箱
物流台车
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼   
仓储笼 
折叠式仓储笼 
托盘 
钢托盘 
钢制托盘 
仓库货架 
阁楼货架 
货架厂 
重型货架 
仓储货架 
重型货架 
货架公司 
轻型货架 
堆垛架 
仓储笼 
折叠式仓储笼 
托盘 
塑料托盘 
托盘 
铁托盘 
铁制托盘 
托盘 
钢托盘 
钢制托盘 
求购货架 
货架求购 
货架制造 
贯通货架 
货架 
悬臂货架 
仓库货架 
阁楼货架 
货架厂 
重型货架 
货架公司 
中型货架 
仓储货架 
轻型货架 
仓储货架
轻型货架 
角钢货架 
货架厂 
重型货架 
货架公司 
中型货架 
货架制造 
悬臂货架 
托盘 
塑料托盘 
仓储笼 
折叠式仓储笼 
托盘 
钢托盘 
钢制托盘 
求购货架 
货架求购  
货架公司 
轻型货架  
仓储货架 
中型货架 
货架厂 
重型货架 
仓库货架 
阁楼货架 
货架 
悬臂货架 
货架 
模具货架 
托盘 
钢托盘 
托盘 
钢制托盘 
托盘 
塑料托盘 
仓储笼 
折叠式仓储笼 
堆垛架 
钢制托盘 
仓储笼 
模具货架 
仓库货架 
货架厂 
仓储货架 
货架公司 
货架   
仓储笼 
登高车 
手推车 
塑料托盘 
货架  
货架 
货架 
轻型货架 
货架 
中型货架 
货架 
重型货架 
货架
阁楼货架 
&