September 20, 2004
If Only Kerry Were a Deficit Hawk
from - smijer
I didn't actually watch or listen to Kerry's NYU speech today. I did read the transcript of it, and I have to say, I am truly impressed with him for the first time. I won't even bother to excerpt it. Read the whole thing. It's all worth while.
I've always been anti-Bush, but I've also been very luke-warm about his replacement. Perhaps I will warm more to Kerry as we get into debate season.
It also appears that a moderate Republican Senator will be joining me in voting against Bush. I can only wonder if Lincoln Chafee and other moderate Republicans would come into the Democratic party if we would put a business friendly deficit hawk like Howard Dean at the helm. As it is, Republican moderates are left only one option for putting the party back on track. They have to withhold their support of the radical wing that is currently in power and prove to the party that its recent drift toward radicalism will cause them to lose office.
::Posted by smijer at September 20, 2004 09:35 PM
This is all the more stunning because we’re not talking about 20/20 hindsight. Before the war, before he chose to go to war, bi-partisan Congressional hearings… major outside studies… and even some in the administration itself… predicted virtually every problem we now face in Iraq.Congress is as much to blame for what is going on in Iraq as the President is. This was bipartisan stupidity. Congress went along with it because they knew that with all of the saluting, heel-clicking and flag waving going on they would lose their next election if they didn't. It was cowardly and unprincipled. Exactly what I have grown to expect from Congress.
I read the entire speech and I did not see foreign policy or Israel mentioned one time. Do you think either of those subjects will come up during the much anticipated "debates"?
|
Posted by Buck on September 21, 2004 12:13 AM Link to comment |
While this speech focused on Iraq and gave Kerry some real credibility on that issue, there was also some implicit foreign policy there. He made it clear that pre-emption of "potential future" threats would be disastrous, pointing out that there were forty countries with more advanced WMD programs than Iraq had.
I don't expect to hear more than one or two token statements about Israel. If I guess right, Bush and Kerry will both (if cornered) blast the Israeli decision about where to build the security wall. That will be their gesture toward "fairness". They will both endorse Israel's "right to defend itself" while not getting too specific on what means are legitimate, and they will blast the Palestinians for continuing to foster the terrorists.
In other words, I don't see much change on Israel policy... Of course, either side may suprise me for better or for worse.
|
|
Posted by smijer on September 21, 2004 07:15 AM Link to comment |
