Let's get all the facts out

Submitted by Dr. Edward J. Margulies (United States), Oct 26, 2004 at 16:26

This article's view says that Bush will stick to his plan whereas Kerry will keep changing his plan. This position sidesteps what the electorate can plainly see, namely that things frequently need to change. Bush makes no attempt to change what must be changed, because he seems to imply that he never did anything wrong with regard to terrorism and the war, or that changing anything will show that he, too, can waffle, and thereby lose the ability to brand his opponent as the waffler. Bush said in an interview that the war on terrorism can't be won. Kerry said that he wants to subdue the terrorists so that they are only a nuisance. Are those positions very different? Of course, both are taken out of context, and neither meant very much when taken IN context.

I hope you appreciate that I am strongly against the terrorists, and that we must do everything possible to crush them. But your article does not suggest that Bush will do this better than Kerry will. I believe that in light of how much has been done wrong and how much dishonesty has been shown by this administration, I think that a new one would be a relief.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".