First of all, let's beat this horse to death:
The First Gore-Bush Presidential Debate transcript
MODERATOR: "New question. How would you go about as president deciding when it was in the national interest to use U.S. force, generally?"
BUSH: "Well, if it's in our vital national interest, and that means whether our territory is threatened or people could be harmed, whether or not the alliances are -- our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped. And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. So I would take my responsibility seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power. Morale in today's military is too low. We're having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well-equipped. I believe we're overextended in too many places."
"..... if we don't stop extending our troops all around the world and nation building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road, and I'm going to prevent that."
"I don't want to try to put our troops in all places at all times. I don't want to be the world's policeman, I want to be the world's peacemaker ...."
more if you want it...
To illustrate the point, the boss tells the story about how one company owner forced his employees to donate money to a certain political candidate. We all agreed this was a bad thing, and I bit my tongue. But then he went on to say that this nasty employer had Dem propaganda all over his office. "Well that figures." someone said.
That's when I went back to my office.
I've been racking my brain trying to figure out how this country became so divided. These people are otherwise very lovely folks. I've always had Republican friends, and my best old buddy has always been a die-hard Republican. We disagree on almost everything political, but we respect each other and we have great discussions. I can see that his views are rooted in something resembling logic, and that he has real values that affect his views. He feels the same way about me.
The difference these days is that the void between Democrat and Republican isn't an issue of values anymore. This void is an emotional one, especially in this election, and at its core is a cold, hard ball of hate.
Hate is a profoundly strong emotion, and our nation is gripped by it at this moment in history. The entertainment insdustry (meaning the media) will feed people as much of this as they'll eat, and people these days seem like they just can't get enough. People like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly can only survive as long as people need an object upon which to expel their bile. Peaceniks, A-Rabs, Traitors and Faggots fit perfectly into this role.
Glad we could help.
But how do you recover from this mind-set in what has come to be known as the post-9/11 world? Which is more dangerous, a large group of violent, well-armed religious fanatics hell-bent on forcing their brand of righteousness on the rest of the world, or a large group of violent, well-armed religious fanatics hell-bent on forcing their brand of righteousness on the rest of the world? What happens when this unstoppable force meets that immovable object? It can't be good.
I try to calmly, politely and plainly explain to my co-worker all of the obvious reasons that Bush is the wrong man for the job. Her response? Her family received a $400 check from the government due to the tax cuts, John Kerry is a flip-flopper, we can't let Iraq go unpunished for not letting us liberate them, and Bill Clinton fucked Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. This is what it boils down to.
Did anyone see Evan Bayh on Aaron Brown's show last night? What a fucking idiot. Brown never got on my nerves that much, but here he was acting astonished that the Iraqis didn't greet us as liberators.
Here's abit from the transcript:
But I wonder why it is that Iraqis, who, after all, we did liberate from a truly reprehensible government, why Iraqis are not more supportive, are not more helpful, are not more willing to fight for their country. It doesn't seem to me they're doing a very good job of it.
BAYH: Well, this is an example of no good deed going unpunished, isn't it?
What? What the fuck did you say? First of all, Aaron, the Iraqis are fighting for their country, and they are doing a pretty good job of it as well... unfortunately for our troops. You can't un-step out of dog shit. Thank Bush for that. And you, Bayh, you fucking jerk... "no good deed goes unpunished?" Are you insane or just stupid?
We were temporarily welcomed as liberators, but that seemed to last for the blink of an eye. And it's irrational to my way of thinking, Aaron, and I'm sure to the American people, here, where we're spilling our blood, we're spending our treasure on behalf of the people of Iraq, but there doesn't seem to be that much gratitude.
But I will say this. An increasing number of Iraqis have shown that they are willing to lay down their lives for their country. These young men who were lined up to become police officers who were brutally murdered, the police officers who were slain in the shooting earlier this week, there are a number who are willing to stand up and fight.
And that's why I think it's important, even if it's an imperfect election this coming January, that we go forward as best we can with the electoral process, because, ultimately, it's the Iraqi people who need to create freedom and prosperity for themselves with our assistance. It is not enough that only Americans are willing to fight and die.
And once they have a legitimate government of their own, perhaps even more of them will be willing to do that.
I'll let you dissect that last passage. Between "there doesn't seem to be that much gratitude" and "ultimately, it's the Iraqi people who need to create freedom and prosperity for themselves" well, there's a lot to work with.
Are these two on crack or something?
Ahhh... I don't know what I'm trying to say today. I'm trying to unravel the ball of tangled twine that is my brain... to quell the electric storm that is my nerves... to soothe the bruised child that is my heart.
There-there, mini-me... it'll be alright.