Daily Kos

View Story | 74 comments

  •  I am not surprised (none / 0)

    at the rhetoric coming from Bush's spokesman here.

    I did a diary a while back called "What don't we GET about the war on terror?" which sought to spark a discussion on what, exactly, the Democrats are alleged to not understand as far as fighting terrorism.

    You will hear GOP supporters all over the place repeating stuff like "pre 9/11 mentality" and talking about how 9/11 changed everything.  To these people we are locked in an epic struggle of good vs evil and in a real clash of civilizations.  Once you accept this mindset - I don't, for what it's worth - your whole frame of reference has shifted.  You have to vote for the guy who "gets it," because if you believe we're in this epic conflict and the other candidate doesn't even KNOW we are, how can we win?

    This is a difficult framework to deal with, and the GOP is pushing it hard by nitpicking Kerry's remarks and taking them out of context.  The point is to make Kerry 100% unacceptable as a commander-in-chief because he doesn't understand the fundamental nature of the war on terror, as Bush is wont to say.  I think this epic-struggle theory is a load of crap but I have yet to hear Kerry really find a compelling counterweight, beyond tough talk about hunting and killing terrorists.

    What I would love to hear is a solid, smart defense of the "we have to make it so that we don't CARE about terrorists" approach.  You can be as harsh as you like - Bush's theory in fact LETS terrorists change our way of life and our worldview, it is DEPENDANT on defining us in opposition to the aims and goals of terrorism.  If you want to define yourself in opposition to terrorism, to live in fear of terrorism and to worry yourself sick over what terrorists want, vote for Bush, by all means.  

    But in my opinion, it is the job of the government and the commander in chief to ensure that we don't have to give a shit about the aims and goals of terrorism, any more than we have to give a shit about the aims and goals of common criminals.  We just have to be reasonably smart about our safety.   But there shouldn't even be a question of what terrorists want (unless you are law enforcement/military trying to track them) - there should only be the statement, terrorists will be stopped.

    •  Shorter version/cliff notes version.. (none / 0)

      The fundamental nature of the war on terror is that the American way of life cannot, should not, and will not be changed by terrorism or fear of terrorism.  Period.  This is a great country and we will not live in fear, but in hope and optimism.

      I have to say that what BushCo is really demanding through this constant refrain of fear, fear, fear, war, war, war, is that we the American people change our fundamental beliefs about what this country stands for and how we view the world.  That, to me, is deeply offensive.  I don't believe any president has the right to demand that.  

      Welcome to the terrordome, people..

    •  The media won't let (none / 0)

      Kerry explain this in an articulate way. I don't really know how you can have an articulate or simple answer on terrorism, beyond Bush's simplistic and dangerous "be afraid and we'll kill everybody be afraid" stuff.

View Story | 74 comments