neljapäev, mai 27, 2004


John Kerry is giving a big speech in Seattle today on how he would fight the war on terror. It includes a lot of substantive, honest criticism of Bush's handling of national security. It deserves a similarly substantive response from Bush. Instead, we get this:

"In the course of his presidential campaign, John Kerry voted for the Iraq War, and then declared himself an anti-war candidate, said it would be irresponsible to vote against funds for our troops in combat, and then voted against funds for our troops in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. The only explanation he offered for this contradiction is that he actually voted for the 87 billion before he voted against it."

Well, if that was the only explanation he provided, that certainly would be awful. Of course, it isn't. He has repeatedly explained that he voted for the version that actually paid for the money and voted against the recklessly fiscally irresponsible version that passed. But why let facts get in the way of a good ad hominem attack?

Nothing about policy. No defense of Bush. No criticism of Kerry's actual ideas. No alternatives. No response. Just raw partisan bile filled with lies.

Sadly, that's exactly what I've come to expect from the Bush campaign.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?