Bush behavior makes issue of his own character

Why do you put things in terms of "stupidity?"

Posted by David Sucher at 03:49 PM, Wednesday, 25 August 2004

You're joking, right? At least I hope you are. Because it's Bush who has constantly been called stupid, as Taranto observes; yet the brilliant Democratic leaders blundered big-time when they let Kerry make Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign. Ferchrissakes, they might as well have run Teddy Kennedy on his driving record in Chappaquiddick.

Posted by Alan Sullivan at 04:49 PM, Wednesday, 25 August 2004

I never jest.

Yes Bush may be stupid but I don't think you'll find that to be a reason that I view him with growing distaste.

Posted by David Sucher at 05:31 PM, Wednesday, 25 August 2004

OK, I'm game. Why growing distaste, now?

Posted by Alan Sullivan at 07:32 PM, Wednesday, 25 August 2004

It's a matter of character. The guy has no gumption, self-confidence, core. No grace.

I thought (had hoped) that Bush would turn out to be one of those "idiot savants" (obviously not literally) who while basically dull have intuitive perfect-pitch in some aspect of state-craft. As I have written, (here on this CC Blog), I used to find him to have some personal charm, and I am not adverse to a muscular American foreign policy.

But his weak and confused response to the disgusting behavior iof the Swift Boat fools indicates his lack of character. And as he himself said, elections are to some large degree about character.

And this is not to shut off debate about anything Kerry has said/done. If you can claim from knowledge that he lied, then go for it. The point is that Bush doesn't have the balls himself to attack Kerry but leaves it to some supposedly independent groups and tries to distance himself from them while still taking political advantage of their attacks.

That's what bullies and cowards do.

I want a President with character. I recognize character. George Bush has no character.

Posted by David Sucher at 08:42 AM, Thursday, 26 August 2004

The initial post and the comments (including Alan's last) are at the usually intelligent and sometimes exasperating here at Fresh Bilge.

Comments

[Alan Sullivan]

Of course you're entitled to the last word on your own blog, but maybe you'll post a bit more of the exchange?

[SheriHarris]

The Clintons might be paying lipservice to Kerry winning the election, and possibly might campaign heartily for him. However, I suspect they hope he loses to Bush, as that increases the chances of Hillary's running and winning in 2008. She'll have to be re-elected U.S. Senator in 2006, to run from a base of strength.

[JRoth]

Ah, since Alan's here, I'll take the opportunity to ask him:

On what planet is John Kerry's honorable and heroic service in Vietnam comparable to Ted Kennedy allowing a woman to drown!?

And in what previous election has any American veteran's honorable (technical definition here) service been impugned? I know of no such national election in our history (if you try to point to Bush's TANG service in '00, then you're being revisionist - that story got not 1% of the ink that these lies have). George Bush, the moral coward, has been fully complicit in dragging this campaign to lows never before seen in this country.

Finally, how can Kerry running on his record be said to be a blunder, inviting lies and smears? In a reasonable world, the SBVT would have zero credibility - every official record contradicts their claims, and they have contradicted themselves at every turn. But in Bush's world - and evidently yours, Alan - simply standing up invites being knocked down. Welcome to American Democracy, Republican-style.

[Reid]

"And in what previous election has any American veteran's honorable (technical definition here) service been impugned?"

Um, try 1996.

"The truth about Dole's war record is considerably less than awe-inspiring. Yet the myth endures, and with the candidate running on the contrast between his and Clinton's military record, his campaign isn't eager to give a more accurate account. Dole, at the behest of his handlers, is less reticent about his service than in the past, but he mainly speaks about his wound and rehabilitation. He has passed up several opportunities to correct the exaggerated versions in biographies, and in the case of his self-wounding has even approved a sanitized account in which his maladroitly hurled grenade goes unnoted. Journalists continue to portray him as a hero, winner of two Bronze Stars. Joe Klein, for example, writes in Newseek that Dole knows 'what guns do. He also knows what politicians do, which is rarely anything quite so dramatic as leading an army into battle.' Such attempts to make political capital out of Dole's war service go beyond the respect due him for the role he played as a soldier with the 10th Mountain Division."--Robert B. Ellis, The Nation, Aug. 12, 1996

[TM Lutas]

I'm not too fond of campaign finance reform. I, like Mitch McConnell and the rest of the 'No' contingent think the first amendment and our political system would be best served by strict disclosure laws and full free speech. But once the law is passed, you have to judge people by their adherence to it.

If Bush were to specifically ask SBVT to stop, they've said they wouldn't. That would make him a weak leader in the eyes of his critics, running an out of control operation. If Bush asked and the SBVT did stop the ads, there would be immediate lawsuits charging coordination, and Bush would be slimed as a dirty politician.

Bush's actual choice is his only realistic choice, condemn it all as nasty politics and ask that it all stop. The only way that he could improve it would be to propose scrapping restrictionism entirely and going for strict disclosure on all political financing.

[David Sucher]

It seems to me more than slightly lame to answer a criticism (of Bush support for untruthful ads) by claiming that "campaign finance rules made us do it." Yes and the dog ate my homework. Whatever the campaign rules, Bush and his people are lying about Kerry.

Have Republicans no sense of honor? Of responsibility? Of decency? Of patriotism?