March 2, 2004

NEW DEAL, NEW FRONTIER, NUANCE (via ef brown):

John Kerry is all tied up in nuances (Mark Steyn, 02/03/2004, Daily Telegraph)

The Tory benches may have what Boris calls "a certain snobbish resistance to his syntax", but I love Bush-speak. "Misunderestimate" encapsulates brilliantly what his opponents keep doing.

Senator Joe Biden - a man so rhetorically insecure that he's the only presidential candidate ever to plagiarise Neil Kinnock - was bending Bush's ear about the need to take a more "nuanced" approach to Afghanistan, and Bush replied: "I don't do nuance." Beautiful, and pithy, and a lot funnier than anything in the Bush parodies. [...]

It is in trying to reconcile both of his strong, clear positions that Senator Kerry winds up tying himself up in nuances. He was at it again this weekend. "This President always makes decisions late," he huffed apropos Haiti. Hang on. He's just spent the past year complaining that Bush makes decisions too early, rushing in when he could have spent another year or so chit-chatting with the French.

I'm sure there are millions of Kerry supporters who'd like to take a tough Kerry-like stand this November. The best way to do that, in the spirit of his war votes, is to vote for Bush and then spend the next 10 years solemnly explaining that that was your bold courageous way of expressing your opposition to Bush.


The Senator was on tonight addressing his supporters after his Super Tuesday victory and he went into this little peroration where he intones: "George Bush says he wants to make this election about national security issues... Well, I have three words for him...BRING IT ON!!!" Does he really think his Vietnam service insulates him against thirty years on the wrong side of every national security issue we've faced?

N.B. During the NPR coverage they were going over some GA exit polls that showed Kerry had lost to Edwards by a wide margin among men and whites of both genders, but had trounced Edwards in the black vote. In a moment of sublime wit, whoever was reading the poll results then noted that 60+% voted for Kerry because of his "electabilty." Is he running for president of the WNBA?

Posted by Orrin Judd at March 2, 2004 10:54 PM
Comments

The Kerry platform appears to be: "George Bush is the worst President ever. Some say he is the worst person ever, more evil than Hitler. I have no evidence for this, but it should be looked into." And anytime he is criticized: "It is simply unconscionable that the Republicans are trying to relive the debate over Vietnam so many years later."

His alternative is to run on his record. It must be good, or why would so many people think he's electable?

Posted by: brian at March 3, 2004 1:37 AM

Kerry can say he doesn't want to talk about his record, and much of the major media many not want to talk about his record. But for all intents and purposes, the primary campaign was over Tuesday, eight months to the day before the general election.

That means the media is going to have to talk about something, and given Kerry's phelgmatic personality, there's only so much you can to do make him either act exciting or more importantly, appear exciting to the American public (the best image I can come up with mentally is or Ted Caddsity as Lurch, getting all fired up playing the harpsicord on "The Addams Family").

The Democrats might be able to stage some sort of "exciting" event for Kerryn at their convention in Boston, but even that's almost five months away. The ratings- and circulation-concious press is not going to put up with people turning away in boredom from 150 days of "I served in Vietnan," so Kerry's record will be a topic, even if the reporters don't enjoy exposing it nearly as much as they do any slip-ups by Bush.

Posted by: John at March 3, 2004 7:25 AM

"N.B. During the NPR coverage ..."

Okay, so I was one of the small bus kids. What does "N.B." stand for?

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at March 3, 2004 7:42 AM

nb = nota bene = "note well"

Posted by: Brit at March 3, 2004 8:08 AM

Jeff - N.B short for Note Bene (Latin) means Note Well
Saw the post-super Tuesday election coverage and of course the focus was on Kerry vs Bush. On Charlie Rose he raised that question - does Kerry's Vietnam service shield him from criticism on national security issues? Almost all of the pundits (and they were some major ones like Charlie Cook of National Journal, Mort Zuckerman, etc.) said YES. So either these people or the blogosphere is in for a rude awaking.

Posted by: AWW at March 3, 2004 8:08 AM

AWW:

That war hero status didn't insulate McCain from attack.

Posted by: oj at March 3, 2004 8:15 AM

Oj - true, but that was early during the Republican primary. And McCain, while a media darling, isn't the Dem nominee who the media see as their best hope to defeat the Dark Lord Bush

Posted by: AWW at March 3, 2004 8:42 AM

The press likes a story and Kerry's various problems make good fodder.

Posted by: oj at March 3, 2004 8:59 AM

Wait a minute. There is no comparison Kerry vs McCain records on National Security. That alone should show that service is no predictor of your record on National Security. In that case, Mc Cain was the real thing -- even if lacking a bit on temperament.

The media is in the worst possition to judge this issue because they are all Kerry clones and live in a Viet-Nam era fishbowl. They will do all the things that AWW says and more, but at the end the basic message the public would get is: Kerry is better (for America) than Howard Dean (which is where the media center of gravity lies on National Security). Any further elaboration of Kerry's voting record, his declarations, and his agnosticism about America will establish that being better than Howard Dean is not enough.

Posted by: MG at March 3, 2004 9:07 AM

Kerry will have a difficult time because at some point, either Bush or another Republican is going to drop the other shoe and just say: 'I never turned my back on my fellow Americans'.

The lefty hive will shriek, led by Daniel Schorr, but the public at large will nod. And Kerry will have a huge problem, one that even Clinton did not face. Kerry's other big problem will be gun control, which came to the fore just yesterday. What about all those Democratic agonies about losing Tennessee and West Virginia? They just stabbed themselves again. You don't tell the public they need more gun restrictions after the nation has been attacked. Watch for the 2nd amendment to morph into a national security issue.

Posted by: jim hamlen at March 3, 2004 9:32 AM

Limbaugh said a friend of his described Kerry as, "gloomier than a rainy Sunday night in Belfast."

Posted by: Bartman at March 3, 2004 1:59 PM

Brit, AWW:

Thanks for relieving a bit of ignorance.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at March 4, 2004 7:26 AM
« I, NATIVIST (via Mike Daley & AWW): | Main | WHY 40% = 60-40: »