February 24, 2004
THE FISH BARREL:
Campaign Begins as Bush Attacks Kerry in Speech: The president shed his above-the-fray posture to defend his record and begin an assault on the Democratic front-runner (RICHARD W. STEVENSON, 2/24/04, NY Times)
"It's a choice between keeping the tax relief that is moving the economy forward, or putting the burden of higher taxes back on the American people," Mr. Bush said. "It's a choice between an America that leads the world with strength and confidence, or an America that is uncertain in the face of danger."Without using Mr. Kerry's name, the president mocked him as a politician whose positions changed with the wind. The Democratic field, Mr. Bush said, is "for tax cuts and against them. For Nafta and against Nafta. For the Patriot Act and against the Patriot Act. In favor of liberating Iraq and opposed to it. And that's just one senator from Massachusetts."
The speech, delivered at a fund-raiser to benefit the Republican Governors Association, was billed by Mr. Bush's campaign as the start of a more aggressive phase of the race after months in which the president, to the growing consternation of some in his party, had remained largely on the sidelines.
Much of the speech was forward-looking. It sought to position Mr. Bush as optimistic and steady in the face of serious challenges to the country and relentless attacks by Democrats who, he said, have failed to say how they would deal with the challenges the United States faces at home and abroad.
"Our opponents have not offered much in the way of strategies to win the war, or policies to expand our economy," he said, sounding a theme similar to one his aides tried out when it appeared that Howard Dean would be the Democratic nominee. "So far, all we hear is a lot of old bitterness and partisan anger. Anger is not an agenda for the future of America." [...]
Alluding to Democrats who have criticized the war but agreed that the world is better of with Saddam Hussein out of power, Mr. Bush said, "Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election."
In an indirect slap at Mr. Kerry, who in a 1970 interview suggested that the United States military should be deployed only under the auspices of the United Nations, Mr. Bush said he would never "outsource" national security to other governments.
Given how easy his record is to run against, it might be wise to wait until Senator Kerry disposes of Senator Edwards. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 24, 2004 9:22 AM
Two points. First note how the Times says the campaign is getting started now that Bush is finally responding to the Dems, the Dems attacks over the past 6 months or so apparently don't matter. Second, OJ has a point - those complaining that Bush hasn't been fighting back need to realize that Kerry is so weak a few attacks could knock him out of the nomination and Bush would have to face the more challenging Edwards.
Posted by: AWW at February 24, 2004 9:54 AMKerry is almost certainly going to win now - I can't see Edwards winning in NY no matter what. Kerry is too tied into the professional party machinery (unions, especially NEA; and the party apparatus - Charlie Rangel, et. al.).
Edwards would be smart to take Hugh Hewitt's offer and go on his talk show (he might win CA if he does it), but he is too tied into being conventional to do it.
The question I have is whether Kerry or Edwards will tell Al Sharpton to go back to the 'hood in the next debate. Just take your jive and go home.
Posted by: jim hamlen at February 24, 2004 11:00 AM