« Terrorism CW | Main | Sloppy Jerks »
March 14, 2004
Overheard on Fox
The Fox News talking heads can't believe that Spaniards would turn out their conservative party in favor of the socialists. Some economic guy said expect for your Spanish investments (if you've got any) to drop 20% over the next month. We'll see.
He also said this: If there were another terrorist attack in the United States, it would ensure George W. Bush's re-election, because he's stronger on the war on terror than the Democrats.
Can you think of any other scenario where this logic is true. Imagine he said "If the stock market crashes again, it would ensure George W. Bush's re-election, because he's stronger on the economy than the Democrats." Or, after passing No Child Left Behind, "If more schools fail, it would ensure George W. Bush's re-election, because he's stronger on education than the Democrats."
This is the single biggest challenge the Kerry campaign faces. Fox News hacks will continue parroting this line no matter what happens, but it must be instilled in the minds of the American people that if we are attacked again, George W. Bush and his associates need to lose their jobs. And because he let September 11th happen in the first place, he should lose his job anyway. Maybe it was just bad luck, we know he's incurious and terrorism wasn't exactly a vote-getter before 2001, but still sometimes people are in the wrong place at the wrong time and they don't deserve to stay there if they screw it up. That's just the way it should be.
Posted by Chris at March 14, 2004 04:49 PM
Comments
right on, any ideas how to best start the message?
Posted by: Tim Cairl at March 15, 2004 08:41 AM
"... because he allowed September 11th to happen in the first place ..."
Chris, you're being a partisan idiot. He should be judged on how they respond to something that likely would have happened or not.
But go ahead, twitter your little memes. (Weren't you doing "Bush lied" at some point do?) Hopefully, the people won't buy it.
Posted by: zachary d smith at March 15, 2004 09:27 AM
At the very least wouldn't it be better for both of us to wait for the commission investigating the incident to finish it's report?
Surely if there is another terrorist attack then he should be held accountable, especially after diverting so many resources to Iraq, which ultimately is a noble goal (and that's about it) but doesn't mean it was the right time for us to do anything about it.
Posted by: Chris at March 15, 2004 09:31 AM
A terrorist attack will only give Bush a spike if he finds a fallguy to blame it on quickly. It's more likely bin Laden will be found before the election if Bush is lagging in the polls, and after the election if he wins.
Posted by: Jack at March 16, 2004 02:46 PM
'... let September 11th happen in the first place'???
fuck you, man -- you guys just really don't get it, do you?
Posted by: kevin at March 18, 2004 09:34 AM
Fair point that the man in charge takes the fall. Had the Dems run with this theme, they would have had a chance to retake the White House. The campaign most pro-war Democrat, Lieberman, was aborted in the womb because of his pro-war views. This is why Dean became a phenomenon. No candidate serious on defense has any chance in a Democratic primary. This is why your point, while fair in any other context, ultimately fails. By punishing Bush, America would receive a President weaker on defense, who would call terrorism a "law enforcement" matter. Therefore, Bush won't get punish and should get reelected.
Posted by: D Held at March 18, 2004 09:39 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)