|
|
- NEWSLETTERS
- MOBILE APPS
-
ADD TIME NEWS
The President's Real Enemy
Toward the end of a long campaign day in Pennsylvania last Friday, George W. Bush had one of those primal moments of joyous aggression that come to all good politicians. He was talking about John Kerry's vote last year against the $87 billion appropriation to support the troops and begin the reconstruction of Iraq. "Only a small, out-of-the-mainstream minority voted against the legislation--and two of those 12 Senators are my opponent and his running mate." The crowd booed lustily, but Bush was
not done. He cited Kerry's now infamous quote: "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." The President paused, chuckled and said, "That sure clears things up." Then came Bush's moment. "The American President," he said, slowly, percussively, chin out, finger stabbing the air, "must speak clearly and mean what he says."
Some will laugh. This President is known for speaking clearly only intermittently. But he was pellucid at that moment--indeed, he was firm, formidable and just about gleeful throughout the speech--and the crowd went wild. It was undoubtedly George Bush's fantasy of what the fall campaign will be like, and he may be right. The President will speak what appear to be simple truths (which will often be shameless oversimplifications of serious policy matters). John Kerry will struggle through tortured complexities, like his explanation of his various positions on the $87 billion: he wanted the appropriation to be paid for by a tax on the wealthy, and when that notion failed, he voted against the bill. But he wouldn't have voted against it if his had been the deciding vote; he would never have stiffed the troops. And on and on. If that's the campaign, Bush wins.
But that hasn't been the campaign so far. Bush has faced two opponents: Kerry and reality. And reality has been the tougher foe. On Friday, for example, the Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee found the President's two main arguments for war in Iraq to be faulty: no WMD, no collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. Bush was forced to acknowledge on the stump that "stockpiles" hadn't yet been found, but he and especially Vice President Dick Cheney seem reluctant to abandon the Saddam--al-Qaeda fantasy. The consequences of Iraq--including the Administration's approval of the use of torture on enemy combatants--have sapped the energy of Bush's re-election campaign. The number in this week's TIME poll that political pros will find eye-popping is that only 43% of the public want to see Bush re-elected; 53% want a new President (although some aren't sure yet that it should be Kerry).
- 1
- 2
- NEXT PAGE »
Most Popular »
- Why Obama Has to Worry About Polls
- Israel vs. Hizballah: Drumbeats of War
- The Pentagon Prepares for a Missile Attack from 'Iran'
- The '00s: Goodbye (at Last) to the Decade from Hell
- Stalemate: How Obama's Iran Outreach Failed
- Will Your Next Car be Made in India?
- Sony's Robot-Cam: Partying Without a Photographer
- Benedict's Pope: Should Pius XII Become a Saint?
- Rehabilitating Joseph Stalin
- In Cleveland, Worker Co-Ops Look to a Spanish Model
- Rehabilitating Joseph Stalin
- New Job for Ex-Soviet Pilots: Arms Trafficking
- Agent Orange Poisons New Generations in Vietnam
- Will Your Next Car be Made in India?
- Dear President Obama: What North Korea Might Say
- Stalemate: How Obama's Iran Outreach Failed
- Slow Times At My 20th High School Reunion
- Why Obama Has to Worry About Polls
- Reconsidering the Miracle on the Hudson
- Benedict's Pope: Should Pius XII Become a Saint?





RSS