The rationale for this war is collapsing around the administration, yet I assume the Bush team feels confident that the public, since they didn’t ask any questions about this a year ago, will remain equally disinterested.
Nice to hear some more strong voices of dissent on this issue. Anthony Zinni was interviewed on Nightline over the weekend, and on the subject of the Bush administration’s approach to Iraq, said:
“If there’s a strategic decision for taking down Iraq, if it’s the so-called neoconservative idea that taking apart Iraq and creating a model democracy, or whatever it is, will change the equation in the Middle East, then make the [public] case based on that strategic decision….I think it’s a flawed–like the domino theory–it’s a flawed strategic thought or concept….But if that’s the reason for going in, that’s the case the American people ought to hear. They ought to make their judgment and determine their support based on what the motivation is for the attack.”
I know I’m not adding much value here, but I agree. I think a great leader levels with the American people, tells them what the real strategy and reasoning is, and builds consensus. The insulting idea that it had to be sensationalized — or outright lied about — in order to gain support, undermines any and all credibility that the actual strategy might have had. I still would have opposed it, but I think it is doubly wrong when we are being lied to – that our support is being sought under false pretenses.
I believe this is the first poll during Bush’s presidency in which he is beaten by another candidate (49/46 Clark/Bush.) Also interesting — “51 percent said they did not agree with Bush on issues that mattered most to them” ..
It’s extremely early, so this hardly matters. But I just had to mention it.
Now here’s a guy who could actually win.
He is a strong, charismatic yet no-nonsense, honest guy and basically a centrist Democrat. His military credentials are impeccable. Domestic policies reasonable. He is brilliant and expresses himself very well and with a style that is relaxed yet focused. I think the Democrats need a guy like this — and who knows, a Clark/Dean ticket might come out of this — Clark can beat George Bush. I admire this guy for putting his ass on the line to make a point that needs to be made loud and clear — the Bush administration hijacked the goodwill of the world that we had immediately following 9/11. They turned the goodwill of the world into a contempt of our arrogance and short-sightedness and incendiery foreign policy. Clark is a man could credibly help us regain the trust of the world.
Mr. Ashcroft, should I be comforted that the FBI simply doesn’t have the manpower to monitor my reading habits?
I don’t always agree with the ACLU, but thank God for them these last two years.
I don’t understand the strategy here… I mean, even from a pure PR perspective this just seems like clumsy work by the RIAA. Leaving out the general bully-ness of it. Why not make it easier for people to be honest?
This unfortunate development today really does leave the US and Israel without a negotiating partner, and it’s a big blow to efforts toward Middle East peace. Developments like this often make me feel the process is hopeless.
Looking at the larger picture and feeling unable to resist the urge to pontificate, I think the US should be much more neutral in this entire process. Our blind support for Israel is imprudent. If we want to be peace brokers, great, I really don’t have a problem with that.. But let’s stop giving Israel tanks with which to run kids over.
There were a lot of questions surrounding Ricaurte’s studies on ecstasy. Most of the objective experts knew that the 2001 results were somehow flawed, yet the media repeated the results with very little critical thought or questioning… now this news shows us that they were giving the monkeys meth!!
