Thursday, September 14, 2006

POLITICS AS USUAL

Kerry is on the road, talking to the little people in diners as he gears up for another run. Who is he kidding? The Democratic Party always eats its dead, and moreover, he ran as good a campaign as he could have run and got beat. He is not a viable candidate. Gore is DOA. He lost and grew a beard and got fat and strange. That is not a leader of the free world. Beware Edwards -- he looks good, speaks well, smiles while lying and is battle tested without having suffered the damage and scrutiny the lead candidate suffers. My dark horse contender is Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell. He is so engaging you almost have to like him even though you disagree with all his policies. When he was doing all the political talk shows in the wake of the 2000 election, saying "count every vote" and all the other things he was supposed to say, he did his undignified duty with such ease and charm that you almost forgave him for being despicable. He would carry this important state with ease. He talks about wanting to get out of politics after his next term (he will win big this November over Republican Lynn Swann) but I don't think he can do it, he loves being the center of attention too much.

Asked if he dreads the prospect of being “Swift-Boated” all over again, Kerry ounters that he would relish such a fight. “I’m prepared to kick their ass from one end of America to the other,” he declares. “I am so confident of my abilities to address that and to demolish it and to even turn it into a positive.”

Kerry’s tough talk triggers laughter from John O’Neill, a fellow Vietnam veteran who helped found Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth and wrote a blistering 2004 book on Kerry, “Unfit for Command.”

“Well, he’s got eight times as much time to prepare for us as he spent in Vietnam,” says O’Neill, referring to Kerry’s short tour of duty.


I came across my copy of New York Times #1 bestseller UNFIT FOR COMMAND when packing for the move in July. I will never forget flipping channels and happening to catch the swiftees' bombshell-dropping press conference at the National Press Club in spring 2000 and searching with no success for the press coverage the next day. The AP reporter who was present at the news conference said the swiftees' contentions "did not advance the story." Huh?? Only Fox News eventually picked it up, and they made it hot to the point where everyone else had to follow. It was the lack of news coverage that motivated O'Neill to write the book that so greatly affected the campaign.

On to Hillary. Last Thursday I listened to Schumer and Hillary giving statements following Bush's speech that day on homeland security. They promised a homeland security policy that is "strong AND smart" (remember: Bush is really dumb). The only substantive thing that Schumer said was that it is a travesty that we only inspect 5 percent of inbound shipyard containers at the ports (never mind that we screen the *shippers*, which is more effective and much much cheaper - but doesn't create new government jobs) and that we provide no security at all on rail transit. Hillary spoke softly and relatively slowly, so as not to sound shrill. I had not heard her in a while and it was clear she has been spending time with a voice coach. She was a far cry from soothing but not as irritating as in the past. She said spending on homeland security is woefully inadequate under this administration because "the Bush Administration and the rubber-stamp Republican Congress" refuses to make any compromises on its number one agenda: maintaining tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. (Are you curious how much Bill Clinton is making per speech? Try six figures.) Schumer said, "We will respond to every single attack -- EVERY SINGLE TIME!!" No doubt he would get many opportunities to make good on that promise, especially if we begin withdrawing troops from Iraq by year end as he advocates. And the US is not more safe, it is less safe, because the US is creating new adversaries in Iraq and around the world because of its agressive actions in Iraq. Therefore, again, we need a policy that is not just strong, but smart. (Bush dumb.) Talk about staying the course!-- don't they have ANYTHING of substance to add to what they've been saying for five years?

I weaned myself off the political talk shows shortly after the 2004 election. I am getting back into it somewhat with the midterm elections and am amazed at how little the rhetoric has changed. Neither side has anything new to say. The strategies are opposite, however. The Republicans say nothing, since they have nothing new to say. The Democrats say the same things over and over, wearing away at the opponent through repetition. Their election strategy is apparently to win by playing not to lose, hoping their opponent doesn't get hot and that they manage the clock and do enough to squeak a tight victory. Any sports fan knows that's not generally a winning strategy, and this one thinks it won't be this time around either. This election cycle has been terrifically boring. Somebody say something about anything!

1 comment:

Dude said...

Good stuff, E. You are much funnier as a Republican than the old outmoded version of yourself.

Post a Comment