MideastWeb Middle East Web Log
The election victory of George Bush has surprised and dismayed many in the Middle East and Europe. It should not have been so surprising.
Last year, before the identity of the Democratic challenger was known, we predicted that Bush would win re-election. It was an easy prediction, because everyone knows it is unlikely that an incumbent president will be unseated during a war. However, a number of other factors, chiefly Kerry errors, also contributed to Kerry's loss:
Appeal to foreigners - Kerry may have lost the election when he mentioned the "global test." His emphasis on multilateralism was certainly a mistake. America originated what is called "disengagement" in Israel -- "us here and them there" in 1823 --with the Monroe doctrine. American distrust of Europe is almost genetic. Part of it is due to the fact that Americans mostly came from Europe and escaped European persecution and intrigue and have a very deep aversion to it. The isolationism that kept the US out of the league is not really dead. It expresses itself in different ways. Multilateralism defeated Wilson and it hung around to whack Kerry on the head too. One of the reasons Clinton defeated Bush is that he promised to concentrate on domestic problems. For many Americans, Europe and Asia are full of countries that are "out there somewhere" and of interest only to the extent that they cause trouble for the USA or take jobs away. Foreigners represent potential problems to be dealt with or supplicants in need of succor, not partners. Rightly or wrongly, Americans perceive that the rift with Europe is not about international legitimacy, but about power and competition for world prestige. For Americans, it is very strange indeed to hear the inventors of the force de frappe and Gaullist go-it-alone policy complaining that the US is doing the same thing.
Bush and the war - Incumbents in war time, as noted, always have an advantage. In this case, Bush has been identified very personally with the war in Iraq and the war on terror by Europeans and Muslims. The Iraq war and the war on terror are Mr. Bush's war in much the same way that the Civil War was Mr. Lincoln's war; the president and the war are far more closely identified with each than, for example, Roosevelt was identified with WW II or Wilson was identified with WW I. However, Americans, of course, identify themselves with the war on terror. The result is that every attack on president Bush by any European or any Muslim is viewed as an attack on the United States. Not surprisingly, Osama Bin Laden's latest attack on Bush was great Republican election propaganda.
It's the terror issue, stupid - Europeans and Asians cannot quite appreciate the impact of 9-11 on the US. There has not been a foreign enemy on US soil since 1812. The idea that someone could reach out and do that sort of damage shook America in a way that even Osama Bin Laden could not quite imagine. Bush understood this gut reaction. Kerry did not. He treated it as just another threat. Bush was also "lucky." Every US administration, Republican and Democratic had misunderstood or underestimated Osama Bin Laden and the Jihadist threat. Bush was forced to face it by the events of 9-11 and therefore was in a position to pose as Mr. anti-terror, even if his understanding and reaction to the threat might be characterized as less than optimal, to say the least.
Iraq - Kerry correctly identified the Iraq disaster as the major issue -- that was not hard to do. However, he failed to bring home the seriousness of the situation or the potential magnitude of the impending catastrophe. He also failed to come up with a good plan to fix the problem. Bush doesn't seem to have a plan for solving the Iraq problem either, but he doesn't pretend to have one. He just keeps saying "We will stay the course." Kerry made the mistake of proposing a plan that anyone could see was unworkable: the US would appeal to its allies to bail it out of Iraq. Everyone understood that it would snow in August before France or Germany would commit troops or money to save the Americans in Iraq. Why should they enlist in a venture that appears to be a disaster, and which, if it succeeds, can only bring glory and benefit to the United States? Why not wait until the US fails and then vulture-in to pick at the carrion? Added to its unworkability, Kerry's plan had the disadvantage of making the US reliant on foreigners. Americans don't rely on foreigners if they can help it (see first point). Nobody expects that politicians will follow through precisely on plans announced during a campaign, but these plans have to sound plausible; they have to convince people that the candidate has a basic understanding of the issues, or at least appeal to the instincts of the voters. Bush can't show a real understanding of the issues, but he could appeal to the instincts of the voters, and his "understanding" can pass muster with the average American: "They" hit us, we have to hit back. Kerry presented a plan that showed he didn't understand the issues and also went against the grain of the American voter. Bush heeded the adage that it is better to keep silent and be thought a fool then to speak and confirm it. Kerry did not.
Social conservatism - Most Americans, especially the ones who care about such issues, are in private much more conservative in their social values (regardless of how they act - people are hypocrites) than the norm that is now customary in Western society. There is probably no way anyone can win votes by advocating gay rights, for example. Except for gay people, most people don't care, and those who do care are more or less uncomfortable with gay marriages, gay pride parades and gay pride television shows. Until their daughter needs an abortion, they may think abortions are immoral too.
Campaign Issues - Kerry let Bush dictate the agenda of the campaign, and had to fight every battle on Bush's turf. Bush's vulnerabilities in the economy, civil rights, incompetent prosecution of the war and invented reasons for invading Iraq were sidestepped in favor of duels about "terror" and "morals." Kerry's inept handling of the Swift Boat Veterans even turned his service record, a solid asset, into a liability.
Israel/Palestine - For most Americans, Palestine/Israel is a minor issue. Bush and Kerry did not really project any differences on this issue except one: Kerry kept insisting that the US must become more involved in the peace process. That could be a very good thing, except that Kerry offered no real plan for solving the outstanding problems except sending more envoys and peace missions. He didn't even hint that he understands the difficulties that must be overcome. In the absence of a realistic plan and a realistic understanding of the issues, the idea of further US involvement in Israeli-Palestinian peace looked like an invitation to step back into the quicksand again.
Plain Speaking - Kerry often spoke in whole paragraph, fifity word sentences. When he was done, it was hard to understand what he had said. Simple messages, repeated often, are the stuff of politics, especially in the USA, where Hemingway is a much more admired writer than Henry James.
"Vision" - Kerry failed to project "Americanism." He failed to show that he shares the American dream myths. Here is part of Bush's victory speech:
To a foreigner, it is embarrassing sentimentality perhaps. This is the stuff of corny World War II movies, and the naive core belief shared by "Gone with the wind" and "Grapes of Wrath." It is part of the image of themselves that Americans cherish, just as French people cherish the "glory of France," and just as many Muslims may dream of past glories and Arabs may identify with the idealized picture painted by Lawrence of Arabia. Every people has its dream images. For Americans, Plymouth pilgrims will do as well as Texas cowboys, but the candidate has to show he is in touch with those American ur-myths, is a real son of America. Kerry could not convincingly project that image. Bush is totally at home with that sort of blarney. Americans wanted a president who they think is like what they believe of themselves: sturdy and honest, and as hopeful as the break of day.
And what of the consequences of US involvement in Iraq, overspending, rape of the environment, unemployment, millions of lost jobs, terror threats on the home front? I'll think about that tomorrow, as Scarlett O'Hara said.
Post Script - This article was intended to explain why Bush won. Americans, rightly or wrongly, judged that he would make a better president than Kerry, because he made his case better, and showed he is more in tune with America. Bush opponents may find solace in the following (thanks to Les Soltes):
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of
Original text copyright by the author and MidEastWeb for Coexistence, RA. Posted at MidEastWeb Middle East Web Log at http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000309.htm where your intelligent and constructive comments are welcome. Distributed by MEW Newslist. Subscribe by e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org. Please forward by email with this notice and link to and cite this article. Other uses by permission.
Replies: 68 comments
It probably didn't help that many people were voting *against Bush*, rather than for Kerry.
Posted by Irina @ 11/04/2004 06:29 PM CST
Kerry would have won easily if he had focussed on domestic issues like healthcare, the deficit, and the financial plight of most working Americans.
For some incomprehensible reason he chose to focus on Iraq even though his own plan for that country was pretty much indistinguishable from Bush's.
Posted by Graham Lester @ 11/04/2004 09:14 PM CST
Kerry and the Democrats should have been against Irak war from the first day and they would have appeared coherent and not as they appeared (and they in fact were) abandoning the boat beacause is sinking. Bush reelection is a bitter thing that all the planet will pay with four years more of childish lies, mindless violence, arrogant ignorance and mad religion. Not to say the elimination of taxes for rich people and the corruption in high levels. I hope the moral and normal people in the USA will manage to build oposition to this catastrophic outcome because Western civilization as something desirable is on stake.
Posted by Aleph @ 11/04/2004 09:19 PM CST
A remarkably astute analysis. Can I persuade you to write for www.wikipedia.org by any chance?
Posted by Ed Poor @ 11/04/2004 11:55 PM CST
Clinton encouraged Kaerry to make domestic issues his cornerstone and build upon sound plans, but he ignored it and chose to continually bash Bush.
Secondly, it scares me to see how conservative and unwordly most of my fellow Americans are. This approach will only cause more isolation and hatred towards America.
Posted by Samantha @ 11/05/2004 01:56 AM CST
Religious right wing ideology and fear (mongered by Bush's team) won the election for Bush. We are a theocracy disguised as a democracy. God help us. (Irony intended.)
Posted by Concerned American @ 11/05/2004 01:56 AM CST
The reason that Bush won is very simple: America is becoming more and more conservative and more and more Christian in the evangelical sense. Republicans often run on divisive issues such as guns, gays and God but it is clear that it works in most cases. Americans must wake up and realize that a president's "morals" are not a vital part of who is he is/ will be as a leader and that Christianity (since it is the dominating religion) has no place within gov't.
Posted by Duff the Satyr @ 11/05/2004 06:57 AM CST
Americans have every right to distrust European nations. After investing hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild Europe after the second World War, what does the US get? A bunch of rebellious kids (excluding England and Italy)so envious of their benefactor they go out of their way to hurt and demean her. The action against Saddam will benefit Europe more than American, yet they did not lift a finger to help, but you can be sure they will insist on some of the spoils when it's over. Ingrates, that's all they are.
Posted by mike levine @ 11/05/2004 07:23 AM CST
Your commentary evinces condescension towards Americans. I have seen this before from Europeans. It's not appreciated. The reason Bush won, is that he's a man of conviction, determination, and faith, and Americans respect those qualities (wherever we see them). We like the culture of Europe but not her morals as we perceive them. It is true that there are hypocrites in America, as anywhere, but it's a mistake to imply that we are all like that.
Posted by James Maddox @ 11/05/2004 07:31 AM CST
I think that if you are uncomfortable with gay marriage and abortions and that is important to you then it is a valid reason to vote for Bush, and I think that it is valid to believe that US policy should not be in the hands of foreign countries in the way that Kerry implied - he went well beyond the internationalism of Roosevelt or Truman. Truman or Eisenhower would NEVER talk about a global test.
To Ed Poor - Sorry, you didn't leave an email address. I am glad to write for any group that pays me. I do MEW for free to promote Middle East peace, as do others who write for us. Wikipedia is also a good cause, but there are many good causes and only 24 hours in a day. Peace in the Middle East and understanding of the Middle East are for obvious reasons much more important to me at this time. Can I convince you to work for MEW?
General - the date of the Monroe Doctrine has been corrected, with many apologies.
Posted by Ami Isseroff @ 11/05/2004 02:47 PM CST
I don't understand how any intelligent person who believes in democracy could have voted for someone as devious and unscrupulous as George W. Bush. Could it be that, because of the so-called "dumbing-down" of America, we are too busy finding things to entertain us rather than seriously researching what is going on in our government? It's amazing how many people believe everything they're told. All it takes is someone throwing out those cheesy lines about the "open plains of Texas" and the "character of our country" and getting those "bad guys", and Americans swoon...I feel like I'm in a movie. How many Americans even know the history of the middle east, and why terrorism exists against us in the first place? America is forever trying to put band-aides on problems rather than look at their roots and really solve them.
Posted by Tammy @ 11/05/2004 05:31 PM CST
I know that this week many of my friends are sharing the same feelings of sorrow and helplessness that I have after hearing John Kerry's concession speech on Wednesday afternoon. He accepted his defeat with tremendous dignity and fortitude. Offering patriotic words of unification and inspiration, he made me proud that I had wanted him to be our president. For many weeks now I've been concerned that this year's election results would prove my fellow Americans to be the most unenlightened, uninformed, and unintelligent people on the planet. Sadly, my fears were overwhelmingly confirmed by the results of both the popular and electoral votes on this election day, and to tell you the truth I am not the least bit surprised. I know that all of the forward-thinking, good-intentioned people out there who voted for Mr. Kerry are asking themselves how President Bush could possibly win a second term in the White House. Here are a few of my thoughts to help those fellow Dems who might be feeling a bit cheated.
1. Maybe We Were Cheated
The process of voting in this country is so inconsistent that procedures vary not only from state to state, but also from county to county within each state. I was very curious about the fact that the media had projected the state of Florida going for George W. by ten o'clock on election night, and I immediately thought of the controversy in the news last week about Florida's electronic voting system and it's lack of a paper trail should a recount be necessary. For all I know, we'll find out in the near future that those voting machines are manufactured by a subsidiary of Halliburton. I also want to point out that my polling location here in Virginia Beach is (and always has been) at a Baptist church down the street. Now I know that at least some of those women who check my identification and hand me my ballot also work at that church. Is it just me, or do these circumstances seem to represent a total lack of the separation of church and state? I wonder how safe my vote really is under these conditions, or if it even gets counted at all. Feeling cheated yet? No? I'll keep going. I am quick and happy to place some of the blame for my party's defeat on the foolish inaction of any American who could have voted yesterday but didn't. Choosing not to vote is an unforgivable insult to that great lady holding the torch in New York Harbor, and to the thousands of servicemen and women in this country who have given their lives generation after generation to protect our rights to vote and be free. Why is it that jury duty is mandatory in this country, but voting is not? Finally, I want to make a point that some of you might find interesting. I was surprised by what I found on the Virginia ballot this year for the office of the president. Along with the Republican and Democratic candidates, the nominees for the Libertarian and Constitution parties were also on the ballot. I figured this was to increase my chances of making a mistake by punching the wrong hole in the ballot. Apparently, Ralph Nader's campaigners were unable to collect enough signatures to get him on the ballot here in Virginia. Thinking about all of these candidates who never had a chance started me wondering about a few things. Any organized party who has a candidate running for the office of the president should be on every state ballot in the country or on none at all, and should also be allowed to participate in the presidential debates. Were these supporters of Ralph Nader even aware that he wasn't on the ballot in all fifty states? What a horrible waste of a crucial vote. I have a message for the members of all of the smaller and independent political parties here in America. All of your hearts are in the right place, and changes in our government are desperately needed, but by not voting the Democratic ticket you are helping to keep the Republicans in power and contributing to the problems and not the solution. There are two major political parties in this country and that is not likely to ever change. You people need to come down off the fence and pick a party, not a pipe dream.
2. Maybe Teresa Heinz-Kerry Was Difficult To Embrace
I've always thought the fact that she wasn't born American (and doesn't even sound American) greatly hindered Mr. Kerry's chances of ever winning the election. The media manipulated her at every opportunity, portraying her as a wealthy, opinionated, domineering, short-tempered snob. No Bush supporter was ever going to be won over by Theresa because of their prejudice against foreigners. Showing anger in front of reporters and being uninformed about the current first lady's resume didn't help, either.
3. Maybe We Underestimated President Bush's Greatest Ally In This Campaign: Fear
Since election day, I have talked to people who told me that even though they didn't like George W. or the mess he created in Iraq, they still voted for him because they felt that he would be better at handling terrorism and the mess he created in Iraq than John Kerry. Oh, and in case you were wondering as I did, neither had seen Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." It amazes me that Americans who don't necessarily like President Bush or agree with him still went out and voted for him. Why? Because they are afraid. Afraid of another terrorist attack here at home. Afraid that Kerry couldn't manage a war on terror because he was against the war in Vietnam. Afraid to change leadership in a time of war. Afraid that one day homosexual couples might walk through the streets hand in hand, confusing any young children who witness such behavior. Today Americans have more to be afraid of than ever before, but I think a sad day has come in this country when voters are more influenced by their fears than they are by the facts.
For those of you who, like myself, voted for John Kerry-
At the end of the day when I put my head on the pillow and think of all the lives lost and impacted under this administration...
3000 people on 9/11/2001
265 people on 11/12/2001
Over 1000 dead American soldiers since we invaded Iraq.
Over 8000 wounded American soldiers since we invaded Iraq.
Thousands of dead and injured Iraqi and Afghani civilians.
Car bombings, kidnappings, beheadings, etc.
...I can honestly say that the choices I've made at the polls in these last two presidential elections absolve my conscience of any responsibility for all of the death and destruction that we now see in the headlines every day. Americans rarely see the big picture, and are inclined to believe anything they hear on the news. They don't realize that war is America's method of population control. They don't know or believe that the Bush and Bin Laden families profited together from this war. They don't understand why the wealthiest people in our country should not be allowed to hold a political office. They have somehow forgotten that America was supposed to be about respecting many different lifestyles and religious beliefs, not just cruelly protecting their own. They think that new forms of government and religion can be installed in foreign countries we don't like by building Wal-Marts there. They have yet to realize that the American media now refers to Iraqi civilians as "insurgents." Somehow they don't see that if a presidential candidate tries to stand up for the middle class, he is torn down and criticized until nobody knows what to believe about him. If that doesn't work, they'll try to fix the election. And if he wins anyway, they'll just assassinate him. These kinds of things have been going on here in this country since before we were born. I can't remember the last time I was proud to be an American. Congratulations, President Bush. Heaven help the rest of us.
Posted by JD @ 11/05/2004 10:49 PM CST
The comments, form the left are typical, some intelligence, little truth, and very little wisdom. Wisdom comes from the Lord.
Posted by John from Kansas, USA @ 11/06/2004 02:07 AM CST
Ami Isseroff - your analysis on why Kerry lost hits the mark more than any so called "professional" in the media - my hat is off to you!
To the rest of the poor lost liberal souls .. I am a hispanic female, also I have a master's degree in Engineering. I live in Miami, a big city, and can assure you that I voted for George W. Bush with pride. I consider myself extremely informed, spending 1 to 2 hours per day, reading articles from the NY Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, as well as the Drudge Report, and various editorialists. I know many people that voted for Kerry, but not a single one got their information about Iraq from any news source other than the liberal TV news networks. In short, they are misinformed, which is why the country is "split"!
George W. Bush won the presidency because he is one of the best presidents this country has ever had! And, thank God, there are still people in the US that are informed, and not merely led around on a leash by the media elite.
Michael Moore, Susan Saranden, George Clooney, Puff Daddy, et al only made the victory ever more sweet! The best part of Tuesday evening was flipping through the networks, CNN, and MSNBC to the see the coverage of the funeral! Their faces in agony, ..not that their candidate had lost, but, that they were so insignificant, that they were unable to fool the HEARTLAND.
God Bless the American Farmer, who is sturdy, and honest, and as hopeful as the break of day ! God Bless George W. Bush, and God Bless America!!!!
Posted by Carmen @ 11/06/2004 03:39 AM CST
To those of you that voted for Kerry, ask yourself, "How many alternate news sources do I get my information from?"
If you get all of your news from Michael Moore, Hollywood, the networks, or a large liberal newspaper, you have been duped!
Get with the program, read and become informed! The Republican Party has a large umbrella, and we are always looking for fresh converts to conservatism ... WELCOME!
Posted by Jose from San Diego @ 11/06/2004 04:15 AM CST
In answer to the person who asked if the voting machines were related to Halliburton -- they were made by Diebold, Inc., whose CEO "Wally" O'Dell promised to deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Bush in a fund-raising letter he wrote in 2003. The Diebold touch-screens are also used in Florida. At one point in the 2000 election, they added 40,000 votes to Bush's total and subtracted 190,000 from Gore's. This was noticed and complained about, resulting in the missing votes being magically restored. However, later on a glut of votes were downloaded for Bush, his brother called FOX to ask them to check again, and then FOX called Florida for Bush. But back to THIS election. In Ohio there were punch card ballots in African American neighborhoods. If the "spoiled" ballots (pregnant chads, hanging chads, etc.) had been counted, Kerry would have been the beneficiary. I think it is a waste of time to ask where Kerry failed. He actually won Ohio and therefore the Presidency. His error was in not going through with his promise to have his lawyers check on a close vote. On the other hand, how can lawyers check on voting machines with no paper trail that were controlled by Republicans under the hand of an evil Ohio Secretary of State?
Posted by Janet Pendleton @ 11/06/2004 06:46 AM CST
For those that have visited our monuments in Washington D.C., they will note that written on the top of these monuments; Moses, and the 10 commandments! other monuments to our great country refer to IN GOD WE TRUST! we can be tollerant of other beliefs, and that is all! we are a country that the founding fathers, and tradition rooted in the LORD OUR GOD..hopefully we as the ancestors of our forefathers, will know the blessings of the UNITED STATES from GOD, are solely because of our traditional beliefs! it is no accident that our president, George Bush is again our president! check out the voice of the people if you have any doubt! as for those liberals that say Government and religion are not one in the same, better go to a high hill and start looking for your maker, if that doesnt work, go again to our national monuments...maybe youll find IT there! thru your tears of pride! And for the countries that hate us, yet we support YOU and your way of life, just know this, from we americans, is the direction of our GOD! When you just cant take our morality more, LEAVE! Its simple, pack your total belongings and go back to your comfort zones! You do not belong in the UNITED STATES to partake of our many liberties!
Posted by Darlene Scott Brenot @ 11/06/2004 05:51 PM CST
Liberal n: not bound by traditional forms or beliefs
When individual freedom is expressed in elections the opposing winning party is accused of cheating. When the goodness of humankind is used for stressing progress in other countries for their individual freemdom it is looked down upon.
This country was founded on tradition forms and beliefs. With out that we would not be America. JD, and others like you, you are only an American by right of birth. You are certianly not an American at heart and you need not be an American by way of address.
Posted by Tricia Fielding @ 11/06/2004 10:10 PM CST
I would like to respond to two statements. 1)social conservatism is not important 2) presidential candidates should not be elected based upon his/her morals because morals dont matter when it comes to being a leader"
Social conservatism is important. To me, and to the Catholic Church..abortion is murder. That baby is a martyr, a martyr who cant scream. Since the right to an abortion was ensured by the Supreme Cout in 1996ish...MILLIONS of babies have died. MILLIONS. I think these babies are just like soldiers being killed. I don't approve of the Iraq more for the most part, I don't like how many soldiers have died. But am I going to vote for Kerry, a pro-choice canidate? Someone who will support the murder of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of babies. The most important issue to me is abortion. I vote for the pro-life canidate.
My first reponse leads to my second one. Many readers might say, "Who cares if the canidate is pro-life? Presidents can't do anything about that." Incorrect. Look at the possible four supreme court positions opening, if Kerry wouldve won -- it is likely four very liberal and young pro-choice judges wouldve been appointed. If so -- surely abortion would continue to be a constitutional right. Now,(and I am glad) Bush(the pro-life canidate) has won. Hopefully, and through the goodness of Providence, 4 judges shall retire. Four conservative pro-life judges shall be appointed by Bush. Hopefully, abortion will be up to the state wheter or not it should be legal/illegal. Even better, abortion will be completely abolished. One last point, I don't respect pregnant woman who kill their baby.
Posted by George @ 11/07/2004 12:00 AM CST
It amazes me that liberals could actually make comments about dead Afgans, among other things. You have to be kidding me, right? Is your vision of the world so myopic that you cannot even see the Afganistanian connection to 9-11, or even the good that has come to that incredibly oppressed country?
I have seen some silly statements made about things, but this one really tops them. Even most liberals had no objection to the Afganistan campaign, as it's connection to terrorism requires very little intelligence to identify.
No, "JD", it appears that you would like to lay even the blame of 9-11 on George W Bush. Again, you have to be kidding me. Clinton, and the first G. Bush had opportunity to put an end to Osama Bin Nutcase, but they failed to do so- especially Clinton. If there is any blame to lay regarding 9-11, very little should be set at GWB's feet, given that he had not even been in office for 10 months.
Your conspiracy theories and class-warfare mentality are really amusing- as long as I keep from thinking to hard about the fact that people like you are actually voting...shiver. You really believe that Kerry, a man who is extremely wealthy, is the "middle class" defender?
I think I will stay away from these web logs- hearing from the mentally-impaired like JD who actually *vote* is more disturbing and less informative than I thought it would be.
Posted by JR @ 11/07/2004 12:16 AM CST
I don't have time to read all that is here, but just in skimming, I do have to say a few things...
Next is the issue of tabulating the dead from 9/11...like someone else said...no finger-pointing at GWB is valid in any way.
Tabulating the dead from this war...why do you fail to mention the number of dead from abortions? I just wish everyone who wants to be pro-choice would have to witness an abortion, most especially a late-term abortion. Personally, as a former fetus, I oppose abortion. Although the following is a comparison of war vs. abortion, don't think that I am for war (but I will support our troops) or that I equate the two. After all, the soldiers did CHOOSE to serve...what choice did these unborn children have?? The media would love to give the face of a pro-lifer that of the lunatic who takes it upon himself to blow up an abortion clinic, but that's almost like giving the face of the teacher who seduces her student into killing her husband to all teachers. So...just swallow these numbers for a moment...and then, maybe you could volunteer at an abortion clinic to help dispose of the aborted babies (I know of a pro-choice nurse who quit because of the nightmares it gave her). Until you've done that, I really think any response you make towards abortion is irrelevant. Add in the numbers you've quoted and swallow this if you can:
Total killed due to abortion since 1973: 44,670,812(44 MILLION)deaths
Oh...and one last point, the "FEAR" factor was mentioned regarding why Bush won. Hello? This is the whole basis of the Democratic ticket year after year (not to mention class envy!)...'oh my gosh...if you vote Republican, your grandparents will be eating catfood, and you will probably be eating worse by the time you are a senior. You will lose your job. There will be some rich person on your doorstep coming to take your last dollar because they don't have enough.' It is easy to scare people who don't study economics (most of our country) because they don't understand what the tax cuts can mean for them, and statistically who really fits into the category of tax hikes.
Anyway...that's at least a few of the things I wanted to say.
Posted by Auggie @ 11/07/2004 03:02 AM CST
Hm, very intersting, that. I have to admit that I was very disappointed to hear that Bush won the election again, but just like Ami summarised it very nicely, it didn't take my by surprise. Let me say that people in the Kerry camp were just hoping for something better to happen after the desaster in Iraq and with domestic issues such as unemployment getting out of hand.
Posted by Anke @ 11/07/2004 06:33 AM CST
I will say that I agree with at least part of JR's contribution: "I think I will stay away from these web logs- hearing from the mentally-impaired like" (Darlene and Tricia) "who actually *vote*" (and drive) "is more disturbing and less informative than I thought it would be. "
Darlene, I don't mean to offend you since it's clear that English is not your primary language, but I'm having a little trouble picking up the thread of your argument. Perhaps you could answer some questions for us.
You began by talking about monuments in Washington DC. I've been to Washington DC, both when on duty at the Pentagon and on other occasions simply as a tourist. I somehow missed the Moses monument. Is it anywhere near the Lincoln Memorial? I also didn't see the Ten Commandments monument. I did however see the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The former document (that means the first one) suggests that we not only can be tolerant of other beliefs but that we must. Indeed as Americans we have a right to other beliefs and an obligation to defend that right for others. To paraphrase an old American standard, while I disagree vehemently with those few things I was able to understand out of your diatribe (use a dictionary to look up diatribe, ask a librarian to help you) I will and have put my life on the line to defend absolutely your right to those beliefs.
(By the way "In God We Trust" is on our money, not on our monuments. Although, as a Republican, I can see how you would confuse the two.)
Regarding "THE LORD OUR GOD...", I'm relatively sure that he didn't write the documents I mentioned. I'm equally sure that He did inspire them. Here's one He did write that you seem to have forgotten: "...and the second is like it, that you shall love your neighbor as yourself." Seriously, do you think loving your neighbor as yourself includes inviting him to leave the country because he doesn't agree with you in some regard?
The next point that I have to make is that I'm fairly certain that it is neither biologically nor chronologically possible to be the ancestor of your forefathers.
About those liberals who don't believe that religion and government are the same thing, would you like to know their names? Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and a bunch of their liberal friends. You can find a complete list on the bottom of the Declaration of Independence. (Go back to that same nice librarian who helped you with the dictionary.)
"And for the countries that hate us, yet we support YOU and your way of life, just know this, from we americans, is the direction of our GOD!"
I would comment if I had any idea what that is supposed to mean. But I do have a question. I think you suggested that the foreigners who don't like us should leave. Where are they supposed to go? Since they're foreigners, my guess is that they're already home in their "comfort zones" wherever that might be. (You are aware that a comfort zone is not an actual place?)
We live in a wonderful country and I love it. We live in a country where any idiot can have access to the internet to spew forth anything that their limited and vile imaginations can conceive. You don't have to be able to write, spell or even reason. You are also free to disagree with anyone, including your government. I agree that it is not in fact an accident that George Bush is our president, a tragedy maybe, but not an accident. The thing to remember is that the president works for us, not the other way around, and that we can and must raise our voices loudly when he or she does anything with which we disagree.
You seem to be saying that Bush is divinely inspired and was placed in his office by an act of God. I'm sorry to tell you this, but the divine right of rulers is precisely what we were rebelling against, not just the tax on tea. For better or worse, this is a secular nation (go get the nice librarian again). It was created that way by people who did not agree with the religious beliefs of their rulers and were invited to leave the country. "LEAVE! Its simple, pack your total belongings and go" They did go. And once they got here, they swore that no ruler of this nation would ever again have the authority to dictate to its citizens what beliefs they must hold. It's true that most of these people were some variety of Christians, but by no means all of them. Since that time, this country has grown and benefitted from a fairly constant flow of the "tired, poor, and huddled masses yearning to breathe free" and by no means have all of them been Christian. The values that define America are tolerance and freedom. You seem to have a need to look up the word freedom too.
And now Tricia.
id.i.ot: n. 1 usually offensive : a person affected with idiocy 2 : a foolish or stupid person
dis·sent v. 1 : to withhold assent 2 : to differ in opinion (that's all, nothing scary)
Amer·i·can n. 3 : a citizen of the U.S.
pa·tri·ot n. : one who loves his or her country
Posted by TJ @ 11/07/2004 09:04 AM CST
America doesn't have to ask for the permission or even an opinion from UN or Europe to defend itself. Americans are very independent people by nature. The whole idea of cooperation with or dependence on Europe or UN is unacceptable to the majority.
Another peculiar detail about Kerry
Posted by Alex @ 11/07/2004 10:24 AM CST
I find your editorial self-indulging and over simplifying a complex event. I continue to pray for the God's guidance of all world leadership in a quest for world peace. I pray for an end to terrorism everywhere. I pray for a peace in the mideast which preserves Israel and at the same time recognizes, helps develop and support a Palestinian homeland.
Posted by Don @ 11/07/2004 03:30 PM CST
HAD TO LAUGH AT TJ....IT WOULD SEEM YOU SO BUSY FIGHTING THOSE "WARS"/INSIDE, THAT YOUR STUDIES WERE HORRIBLY LIMITED! OBVIOUSLY, DICTIONARIES AND PUTTING YOUR HEAD INSIDE, HAS NOT ADDED TO THE HUMAN EXPERIENCE, NOR INTELLIGENCE/IGNORANCE PERVAILS EVERYWHERE! I DONT MEAN TO OFFEND YOU, HOWEVER SOMEWHERE ALONG YOUR ROUTE OF LIFE,YOU HAVE GOTTEN HI-JACKED OF YOUR AMERICAN "HERITAGE/BELIEF CAPACITY/AND A PROPER HIGHER EDUCATION"! IF IN-FACT YOU EVER HAD THEM! OBVIOUS ALSO, YOUR SOCIAL BEHAVIOR TO ATTACK WOMEN MUST HAVE BECOME HABITIUAL ALONG YOUR WAY. WILL SIGN THIS D. BRENOT INSTEAD! THANK YOU TRICIA...HOPING YOU LIVE IN ANOTHER PART OF THE COUNTRY...HYPOCRITE DEFINED! MANY IDIOT HYPOCRITES WHO CARE NOTHING ABOUT THOSE WHO DIE WITHOUT EXPERIENCING FREEDON..DO YOU "REALLY" CARE? READ MORE TJ...NOT JUST WRITTEN BY THE OTHERS HERE; TRY TO GET OUT OF YOUR HOLE THAT OBVIOUSLY YOU LIVE IN! IN THE MEANTIME, ILL PRAY FOR YOU/AND THE "HISTORIES" OF YOUR SOUL, D. BRENOT
Posted by D. BRENOT @ 11/07/2004 06:15 PM CST
One thing you can't dispute is that President Bush won nearly 52% of the vote.. and contrary to some rather rude British papers, we aren't dumb Americans. There was no conspiracy or voter fraud. Those of you that didn't vote for him, get over it. America has begun to turn towards a new conservative view. Bush did not say he had a mandate, the papers coined that expression. What he said was he had gained some political capital, that the people that voted for him wanted to see a revision in taxes, social security and have a strong stance against terrorism. Frankly if Democrats want to move to Canada and other countries, go for it. Ever hear the phrase sore loser?
Moral values aren’t about gay marriage. We are not homophobes or frightened of gay couples wishing to have the intimacy of marriage. The founding fathers never defined ‘marriage’ as between a man and a woman, because they didn’t have to. You didn’t have openly gay men or women back then. Yes there are many who think ‘marriage’ should be defined as a man and a woman. This goes back to traditional conservative values. I support civil unions and frankly I don’t care what you do in your bedroom. It’s your business who you want to spend your life with. But you also must remember that many people aren’t ready for openly gay unions. Especially in small towns. And no I’m not from a small town. I live in the suburbs of New York, thirty minutes outside the city. And in fact can see the city right up the Hudson River.
VALUES encompass an entire list of things. For instance I personally was offended when Clinton was caught with his pants down in the oval office. He embarrassed the country. Oral sex is not sex is something I’ve heard repeated many times by teenagers. Imagine having to explain what exactly he was doing to your children. (2) Not everyone approves of various TV programs that use cursing and sex to improve ratings. (3) The music of rappers and others are disgusting and degrading. Forgive me but Eminem is a disgusting little jerk whose songs are listened to by teenagers. Not simply that song about President Bush but songs about rape and killing his mother. This is not who I would call a role model. And please don’t go on about free speech. Yes he has the right to sing or say what he wants, however there is a line of bad taste. (4) Hollywood. Kerry constantly had singers and Hollywood supporters giving him money and support. Hollywood celebrities do not represent most people.
Values aren’t necessarily about abortion. Yes I’m republican, however I’m pro choice. Pro choice isn’t about whether abortions should be legal. Pro choice is about if women have the right to get an abortion. Until you are put into the position of whether to face an abortion I don’t think you should judge others. There are reasons why women aren’t able to take care of a baby. Also not all babies are healthy or even mothers. There needs to be guidelines to allow for termination of pregnancies where the mothers health is in danger or the babies. Perhaps the baby has a defect or is facing a short life or even a life in a wheelchair or worse. This is an individual decision that needs to be made by the mother and doctor, not a group of people protesting abortions. And please don’t tell me that there are those who would take all the unwanted babies. Minority, drug addicted and even aids babies. These are babies who need special care, money and many don’t recover. States don’t have the money to support all these babies, and unfortunately abortion is probably cheaper.
Last but not least.. I support our troops and yes we’ve had casualties. That’s what happens in war. The men and women serving in Iraq are VOLUNTEERS. Many countries FORCE you to serve. The UN is WRONG to have pulled out of Iraq and I have no idea what’s going on with France. America has every right to defend ourselves. And Saddam was a terrorist and a danger to us and others. I’m tired of different countries condemning us, ones that will surely reappear once Iraq is free. They will turn up for their oil. The UN should be helping us, they certainly were paid in advance. By Saddam’s bribes, we know that France was paid off along with Germany and Russia and how many more??
The news media is liberal and if anything has been shown CBS and ABC and the NY Times are past their prime. Yes I watch Fox and no they aren’t right wing. They give a fair and balanced view on things. Just because they don’t slant left the other networks claim they are right wing. Check out their ratings, they are higher then the local channels.
I for one did not vote for Kerry. Not because he’s a Democrat, but because he never came across as truthful or having a real plan. He kept saying we have a plan, but never told us what it was. He would have weakened our defenses just as Clinton did. And don’t fool yourselves, Osama Bin Laden planned the 9/11 attacks YEARS in advance. During Clinton’s reign he weakened out defenses, our troops and our security. He let Bin Laden slip through his fingers TWICE.
Terrorists need to learn that America isn’t Spain or Italy or any of those others countries who don’t respond to their attacks. They came onto our soil and murdered thousands of people, and now we will retaliate in kind. Executions and beheadings just make us mad.
Posted by Kelly - New York @ 11/07/2004 07:41 PM CST
I can only pray to God that the Republican party continues to have spokespersons exactly as articulate as you to give voice to their point of view for the forseeable future. Please save your prayers, as God and I are on pretty good terms. Your assumption that anyone who might disagree with you or George Bush must of necessity be against God and your second assumption that I am male and that I care about your gender is suggestive of your level of prejudice. Although, on second thought, maybe you are right. We probably don't worship the same God. The God I worship admonished us to tolerance when he told us that "In my father's house are many mansions." He also told us that to love one another was the same as loving God, and advised us to take the plank out of our own eye before seeing to the cinder in someone else's. Finally, He told us to turn the other cheek when struck. So, here is my other cheek. Feel free to strike all you want. I am secure in the belief that God's wishes are not served by waging a war of vengeance, and that he will forgive you your bitterness and anger. I will pray for you, as well.
Posted by TJ @ 11/08/2004 12:02 AM CST
for tj...i can only surmise what the T.J.stands for; there is no doubt in my mind and heart we do not serve the same Lord..read HIS word further, and you will find there is a picture and plan far beyond the quotes youve made that are certainly self indulgent! when you are on your knees in prayer, ask God to bless you with the knowledge of his word, you will then not find it necessary speak without the total picture of Gods plan. d. brenot oh, about our national monuments, perhaps you havent looked high enough to see clearly!
Posted by D. BRENOT @ 11/08/2004 04:16 AM CST
I was blindsided by the re-election of GWB; I thought we could really do it, and devoted most of my spare time this past year to electing a viable alternative. I have been naive about how so many Americans feel; witness the many fearful, hate-filled, and self-righteous comments above.
Ami Isseroff's commentary is insightful, especially the observation that Americans will vote more conservatively than they will acknowledge in public.
And beyond Scarlett O'Hara's thoughts? That people will brandish Christ's teachings to justify 1)pre-emptive war in a land where they demonstrate no empathy toward the inhabitants 2) the propagation and protection of the wealthy at the expense of the poor and the environment ("A rich man will enter heaven as easily as a camel will pass through the eye of a needle."), 3) hatred of homosexuals 4) the labeling of war and greed as "patriotic," and 5) electing a leader who, with his lack of forethought and his belief in Armageddon, could easily lead us into nuclear war without a second thought - well, I can't help but see tremendous contradictions there, and a complete detachment from the teachings of Christ and the preciousness of all life.
I am deeply saddened and fear the worst. I can only ask my fellow citizens to open their hearts and minds so that we may work together to avoid destruction of the world as we know it.
Posted by Linda @ 11/08/2004 05:52 PM CST
Hindsight is of course 20/20. Where were all the armchair pol. advisors during Kerry's run for office? Now maybe we can all turn our keen minds toward surviving the next 4 years instead of rehashing what should have been done! God save us all.
Posted by Semper Fi @ 11/08/2004 11:42 PM CST
Whoever wrote this article is an idiot
Posted by Pissed off @ 11/09/2004 02:08 AM CST
Oh please, calling somebody an idiot without even saying why that is so and what you would have said differently is
Where are you from, "pissed off", may I ask? Well, wherever it is, your attitude is exactly what others hate about Americans/pro-Americans. You really have no concept how much people dislike you and why that may be, nor do you see any need to question it...I feel deeply sorry for all the lovely Americans who I do know and who do have a brain, which they employ to actually do some thinking and make some qualitatively valuable statements.
Posted by Anke @ 11/09/2004 04:04 AM CST
"Bush & Cheney" 2004 Bumper Stickers - $5.00
Donation to the RNC - $1,000
Watching the Liberals and Europeans become completely unwound after November 2nd - PRICELESS!
Posted by MIke Hansen @ 11/09/2004 05:29 AM CST
I voted for Bush because:
1) The abortion issue. Kerry voted against measures that would stop doctors from literally sucking the brains out of babies through a tube after puncturing their skulls with scissors. That is as barbaric to me as the beheadings going on in Iraq.
2) I don't see how the terrorist issue will ever stop if the environment where they come from is not changed dramatically. I don't like war, it is disgusting. But, I think it is a necessary evil. I don't see any way to solve it peacefully. I think that Kerry would have tried to cure the cancer that is terrorism with pain medication. Cancer must be destroyed; it can not be simply ignored with "aspirin".
3) The economy: I simply agree with the Republican philosophy in more cases (not all) than the democratic one.
4) I don’t see people as heterosexual or homosexual. I understand that we all have natural and nurtured tendencies, but what separates us from mere animals is our ability to go against the grain. I am more than a simple sculpture molded by the constraints of the society in which I happen to have been raised. Just because I (age 33 and married) find 18-year-old girls sexually attractive, does not mean that I ought to fulfill such desires. Likewise, if I find men attractive that does not mean it is right for me to lay with them. Because I find such actions to be immoral, that has nothing to do with my intellect although it would seem from reading posts here and many other places that the mainstream “liberal” try and say that we “conservatives” are somehow lacking when it comes to intellectual prowess.
Kerry flat out stated that he would appoint only judges that agreed with his stance on abortion, and I would imagine “gay rights” as well. As I tried to point out above, I think “gay rights” is simply a phrase meant to beg the question that being gay somehow separates one human from another. There are no “white rights” or “black rights” or “gay rights”; there are only human rights.
As far as the article is concerned; I liked it even though it implied some beliefs / values held by a conservative are false or even idiotic.
Posted by Travis @ 11/09/2004 11:07 PM CST
Although JD has put together a nice tally of "lives lost and impacted under this administration", why does he stop there? Why does he fail to include all the lives lost (2 million by some accounts) and impacted under Saddam Hussein's "administration"?
Why is it that people who were killed under Saddam's regime don't seem to matter? Where was the international outrage? And if there was outrage, why didn't anyone do anything about it?
So I ask JD, why the concern only about American lives?
Posted by Jim @ 11/10/2004 08:52 PM CST
I just want to make it clear:
I am begging the world community to understand that there are literally millions of Americans who are totally disgusted with what our country has been doing in the past couple of years. Really, we're trying to change it. That is all I want to get out there.
Posted by rant79 @ 11/11/2004 04:23 PM CST
"There has not been a foreign enemy on US soil since 1812"
What about Pearl Harbor?
Posted by Confused @ 11/12/2004 05:09 PM CST
Kerry was just a big fake. What hurt him was having little moral background and Bill Clinton. Don't you think bin Laden's people would have hidden him well?
Posted by Unknown @ 11/12/2004 08:09 PM CST
after reading the veried comments i feel a great need to say something to most all of them.so where to start.first this causes so much pain, the anger is hurtful the need to tell everyone off seems to be the strongest drive.tell me has anyone changed there mind,is anyone really open to truth or just understanding. i too want to open your eyes and hearts. misinformed people have such strong feelings, what would be just the right thing to say,does anyone even listen .I have found that to hear both sides and to try to findout the truth before speaking is the best way to go.we can like it or not but it will not change the fact and in all cases there is a truth I like to look it up in the directions left by the Creator of humans seems best place to look,it can be long and a little hard to understand but oh how it is worth it the real power is in the truth lets try to find it before cutting others down they just havent read the directions!
Posted by leanne peace @ 11/13/2004 07:05 AM CST
I just want to appologize to the world for the state of affairs in the United States government and throughout the nation's populace. I have no answers. I just want the people of the world to know that I regret the tragedy which is befalling the peoples of Iraq and the lost lives of innocent humans who are caught in the middle of this conflict. I know that thousands of children are suffering and the pain will scar them forever. I know that mothers are crying for the loss of their sons and daughters. I hope the pain will not grow into a permenent hatred of Americans. Please remember that there are many U.S. citizens who did not approve this military action initiated by G. W. Bush. ---- I do pray that this will be over soon and the Iraqi people will be able to heal. Yet, I am not so niave to believe the pain and death of this terrible ordeal will not have a long lasting impact on the Iraqi nation, as well as on the peoples of America. I only pray that some how this mess will end soon. Until then, please know that there are people in America who wish this had never happened; there are people who did not give their approval to the policies issued by the current presidency. I am proud to be an American and would like to see all of the world have the blessings this nation affords its people. However, I will never be proud of the murder of innocent people in the name of freedom. Sincerely, Dixie Tietje
Posted by Dixie Ann Tietje @ 11/13/2004 08:12 PM CST
Isn't it a bit silly to appologize for trying to liberate an people from the hands of an very oppressive regime? These people were being killed, raped, and oppressed for decades before we invaded. While the death of innocents is always bad, it's much more preferable that they die due to collateral damage from the battle for freedom than to die in a rape room because evil person decided to torture them to death.
Posted by Razor Ace @ 11/13/2004 09:43 PM CST
Thanks for the run-down, Ami. For "Don" to say your article was "self-indulging" was out of place but he's somewhat right to say you are "over simplifying a complex event". However, I sense that the cornerstone ("mostly Kerry's errors") of your analysis is solid.
As soon as the conservative govt in Australia was re-elected it seemed very likely the US would follow this pattern. While the issues and national priorities were different, the similarity was in the perception (that is the APPEARANCE) of the conservative leaders as
Without getting emotive about it, Kerry did not project deep-rooted understanding of issues, intelligence to come up with solitions, or any kind of dependability in a crisis - more just the fact that he could be another good, well turned out figurehead. Democrats surely can only give thanks for the bulk of votes they did get to anti-Bush sentiment, not confidence in Kerry.
Posted by Lisa T @ 11/14/2004 09:36 AM CST
I too was saddened by Kerry's loss, this means during the next four years the Democrats must do everything possible to get their people out to vote. And more importantly place a nominee that the Republicans cannot bash constantly, someone who is squeaky clean. The next four years are going to hurt the poor, the working class and the retirees and hard telling when that will be able to be fixed after 8 years of Republican rule.
Posted by DR @ 11/14/2004 04:46 PM CST
PRESIDENT BUSH IS NUMBER ONE AND I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER HEINZ PRODUCT AGAIN CAUSE HE GAVE ME A BAD TASTE IN MY MOUTH. THE MAN IS A TRAITOR, GOD BLESS AMERICA
Posted by lenny @ 11/14/2004 07:30 PM CST
52% of Americans are really smart. They voted for a leader that had them loose Millions of jobs. Had them go to a war against a country that had no WMD. Going after a country (Iraq) that had no Sept.11th Terrorists.
Posted by Don Johnston @ 11/14/2004 10:38 PM CST
Hooray for Don Johnston I could not have said that better
Posted by DR @ 11/14/2004 11:53 PM CST
The intensity of feeling in these postings echoes in sad irony those in a forum discussion at www.allaboutpalestine.com about the Christian Phalange massacre of PLO camps in Lebanon (which I looked up after seeing a postmortem documentary about Arafat.) There, new highs in vitriolic mud throwing were reached as Israelis and Palestinians took their arguments back from Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, to PLO execution of Christian Phalange leaders to Damour, to World War II. Wait a few weeks and they should be reliving the reported hatred of people who died thousands of years ago.
Is America’s destiny a similar debate of our differences a thousand years hence? Blue vs. Red states - as we still do in my border state of Maryland about Blue vs. Grey of the 1860’s Civil War? Aren’t all States really purple? 9/11 first united us then accentuated our differences. Like Israel and Palestine, one segment of our population took on fear and security in an emotionally rewarding eye for an eye approach, while others took a more complex route. Are we spreading democracy in the Middle East or joining Israel and Palestine on the same slippery slope? Do we simply slay our enemies and secure our borders, or also try to understand what makes others hate us and see if we should rexamine some of our policies? Every graduate school now has students work in teams because the best ideas come from examining the widest spectrum of ideas. Would this not be a good approach for all nations of intelligent caring people?
Do others see an irony in the polarity of our national figures? Bush is a hero for many Christians, and a man of anti-Christian behavior for many others. Is it not the same for Sharon, Arafat and Bin Laden? Are our leaders taking us to the brink of disaster, or are they so polarizing us that in this internet age we little people will find a way to marginalize our governments and seek peace with directly each other?
Moral issues were declared to be central to the U.S. elections. Do Republicans have a patent on morality, or does America for that matter? How does America’s acceptance of the “collateral damage” death of thousands of innocent Iraqis differ from those of Jews, Lebanese and Palestinians in our respective wars? Are we not all supposedly fighting for freedom and the moral survival of our peoples? Perish the thought that the Taliban thought they too were restoring a moral society! Is there a common goal in this somewhere that we can work on together? Do we not each think God is on our side, as the Generals of both North and South did in the 1st U.S. Civil war?
The 9/11 journey has led this lifelong Republican not only to become an Independent but to go beyond Christianity toward a more universal faith where all religions are respected. I love
This week my brother, who worked in the WTC, complex starts a long overdue anger management treatment for Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. His pent up anger and hatred for the deaths he witnessed and policies despiseshas been eating him alive. Are not the streets of both sides of Jerusalem also filled with people bearing similar scars? His counselor will not delve into the past in search of the roots of his anger, saying that approach doesn’t abate, rather perpetuates anger, as we are powerless to change the past. Instead he concentrates on the empowerment of building a better present and future by learning techniques to manage anger, and to recognize and shut off those destructive thoughts of hatred and vengeance as they arise. This control will allow us to concentrate on the good in our relationships with others - on what we have in common rather than what separates us. What do you say Red States, Blue States? Palestine, Israel? America, Europe, and Middle East? Is anyone else out there game?
Posted by Red and Blue makes Purple American @ 11/15/2004 05:53 AM CST
I know Clinton didn't get bin laden but have george W got him yet? It was republicans who let world know that U.S. presidents lie. If pro-choice is baby killing,is pro Catholic church pro the raping of little boys?
Posted by tach @ 11/15/2004 06:44 AM CST
The overwhelming re-election of George W. Bush was the voice of America speaking loudly and clearly. It said we will not be intimidated by madmen like Bin Laden or Hussein. It said we will not be influenced by the gutless French or German. It said we will not allow an idiot like Micheael Moore and his elitist Hollywood friends to hijack our country or it's beliefs. But mostly it said we are still a proud, moral nation willing to do whatever it takes to protect our country and it's freedom. God Bless George W. Bush and the United States of America.
Posted by joe @ 11/15/2004 10:04 PM CST
Yes, I agree God Bless America, however, only 52% of the people voted for George W, and when you look at the head lines today with regard to the insurgents in Iraq and how our young men are being killed and maimed because George W. went in without forethought and or proper reason, that is certainly a sin. Those 52% surely didn't understand the impact this man has had on our Country. We once had respect from around the world, now we are a joke, our dollar is lower than ever before our debt is higher than ever before, he has taken money from Medicare and Social Security which the retirees will suffer for, are people just not looking at any of this or is the 52% all wealthy Republicans that could care less about anyone under them?
Posted by DR @ 11/16/2004 01:21 AM CST
Bush and the Republicans won because Bush is the better leader. Kerry proved in North Vietnam that he is unable to lead this country anywhere but down the drain. Oh, and don't go on deluding yourselves that the US was "respected abroad". The US was ENVIED abroad. Anti-Americanism has been circulating abroad for years it is only recently and by Democrats that it has become so frequently voiced at home. Big mistake.
Posted by Katherine McLean @ 11/16/2004 03:13 AM CST
Tach...that comment shows your total lack of understanding, and a common tactic in diverting attention away from the issue. It also was an unfair and inaccurate analogy. Being a Catholic doesn't mean you voted to allow those unspeakable acts that those men have committed, but voting Pro-Choice does vote to allow abortion, whether technically the vacuum extractor and scalpel are in your hands or not. BIG difference. Oh, and being pro-life doesn't necessarily mean you are a Catholic either.
It's usually a good thing to understand what your saying before you say it.
Just my own humble opinion.
Posted by Auggie @ 11/16/2004 11:44 PM CST
I can assure you that you are deluding yourself there, Katherine McLean. I am British and I've got to say I don't envy Americans one bit. Certainly not for the next four years at least. But I am fairly confident that your choice of President represents less of a threat to Americans than than he does to the rest of globe's population.
Posted by Luke @ 11/17/2004 03:37 AM CST
reading all the supporters of bush, no president of mine, i have a greater understanding of why i hate him. I have done a lot of research on both sides of the argument, I just don't understanfd how or why the Americans voted the way we did(your article was very helpful, however, I still dont understand.) I am a 14 year old American who has lived in Europe for two years, seen things in the middle east that most american will not understand or have the ability to see. I'm the voice of tomorrow, and the american public voted wrong. thanks guys, by the way, the reason we went to iraq was for oil, bush changed his alibi several times, and did you know that he tried to present a resolution to the UN trying to limit oil coming form other places manily outside Iraq and his good friends from Saudi Arabia. did u also know that bush offered a tax reduction if u bought a suv over the price of 50000usd, which need lots of petrol. I thought this was a little fishy, check out http://www.crikey.com.au/whistleblower/2003/12/03-0004.htm
Posted by michelle @ 11/17/2004 05:35 AM CST
I want to say something about Bush being a leader and about leadership conceived in the biblical terms. Years ago there was done an experiment in a US univesity that ilustrates the concept. They took a school of tropical fishes of that kind that move all together and put in a big tank. Normally they aligned randomly following a very complicated pattern which is the result of the perception of all of them to the diferent dangers or opportunities. This is efficient because these fishes are very succesful in their natural environement. What the scientifics did was to blind one of them so he cannot perceive the alignement of all the others. From then on, the rest of fishes aligned automatically to the blind one that suddenly became the leader. So the flock became disfunctional and unable to survive because they follow the one who knows nothing in the believe that he knows more than them. So be careful identifying "leader" with someone with no doubts and who gives simple answers (even dressed as sophisticated theories by Mrs. Rice or as aphorisms by Mr. Rumsfeld ).
Posted by Aleph @ 11/17/2004 02:28 PM CST
For those of you who only watch FAUX News and were not kept informed by your pastors: Abortions have increased during the Bush administration. They were on the decline through the 90's but then 2001 and Bush Inc. happend. The year 2002 saw the largest increase of abortions ever. Pro-life? If you consider that this administration only supports abstinence only programs, that
Posted by Donna @ 11/17/2004 10:08 PM CST
I, for one am not a supporter of Goerge Bush. This does not mean I am all that favourable of Kerry either. However, the greatest concern is for a leader who is able to guide us through a just and ethnical manner. I , too have seen Micheal Moore’s documentary and good for him to voice out his own opinions, after all we are a democracy and should be allowed to be heard. I do believe that Bush’s political status have lifted due to his father, Sept 11 and issues concerning Iraq. I am definite that it had something to do with the oil, as his background does involve it. The reason for not being a supporter of his is simple. There is no excuse, what so ever that he should use the excuses such as WMD, terrorism and freedom of the people of Iraq, because of this many innocent lives have died and still the people of Iraq are in situations near to imprisonment with American troops patrolling the streets, who I think probably have no idea why their doing this, or has been told by Bush otherwise. And yet, in the end have they found WMD? Are the people of Iraq feeling the freedom? Have there been any cases of terrorism linking to Sept 11 in Iraq? Maybe America has made a mistake, or maybe not? I dunno, but I think it’s time to make things right, or rather improve them. God Bless America..
Posted by anon @ 11/18/2004 02:45 AM CST
1.Never voted for anyone based on the abortion issue.
Posted by mary @ 11/20/2004 04:20 PM CST
Kerry had nothing to offer. The only people that I know of voting for him only did so because they were opposed to Bush or "the war". They overlook the fact that Kerry & the majority of congress also voted for the war. People put blame on the President for things he can not control. People are lazy and want hand-outs. More social welfare. If we would all work and take care of our own problems instead of whine about everything we wouldn't have recessions or high unemployment rates. Guess what? If we did any kind of job preparing for our own retirement we would not have to rely on the government to take care of us. That solves the socalistic insecurity problem. As individuals we need to take more personal responsibility and rely less and less on the government... for the good of our children and our childrens children.
Posted by Ben G. @ 11/21/2004 03:26 AM CST
Bush won because Kerry was perceived as a weaker leader, someone who "Voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it" and "against gay marriage yet for civil unions". Kerry's VP did not even help him win the state of NC. Bush won because the American people don't want to have to wait around to pass a global test. Who administers this global test? Is it the United Nations that is to administer this global test while mired in the oil-for-food scandal? They should be cooperating with the investigation so we can see who were the recipients and beneficiaries of the billions of dollars withheld from the Iraqi citizens.
Posted by Kathy @ 11/21/2004 07:01 PM CST
At this point it really doesn't matter who is in office. The country is so divided and I guess republicans and democrats (lower cased on purpose) forgot that a house divided cannot stand. republicans are hypocritical and democrats set no boundaries. Whatever happened to people being able to form their "OWN" thoughts without relying on the media,etc. to control their fears, hopes, and realities? Where are the individual thinkers? Is it easier to believe a lie than the truth? What you see is not always what you get. Fear and false morality is what got Bush four more years.
Posted by Taylor @ 11/22/2004 06:10 AM CST
Please let me clarify a few things for some of you people. I was in the military for 8 years and I would go back and fight for a president such as President Bush. As a military member you take alot of pride in being a soldier and fight for the honor of the United States people. Everyone who does not support the war I understand why. I don't like to see death of women and children let alone the enemy, but it is necessary to try to keep the world safe. Mr. Hussein was an evil man who killed many of his own people. Make no mistake this war is about many things and yes oil probably is one of them. These terrorists claim that we are out to kill the muslim faith. We were in the war originally to get the evil Iraqi leader out of power. The terrorists came to us and decided to terrorize the Iraqi people as well as try to kill americans. The shame in all of this is the leaders are the ones sending people into battle. Are they the ones dead or is it the other way around. I don't think that the radicals of the muslim religion values life. They believe that if they die for their cause that alah with take them to heaven. I am sure that anyone with some common sense should know that killing yourself gets you only one place and that is six feet under. I would not ever want my son or daughter killing themselves. If you truly love your children why would you want death upon your children. These people who are breeding hatred into this world are doing themselves a dis-service. I pray for these people and love them, but look into your hearts and rid it of hate. Jesus was a true lover of people. He gave his heart and soul to the world. We should be so lucky as to stand beside him in the heavens and on earth. To me this war was not about religion it was turned into that through the hatred of the radicals of the islamic religion. I believe that the President of the United states truely wants peace. If all the Iraqi people would just let peace come to their nation they could be a very powerful nation full of prosperity. All those billions of dollars Mr. Hussein siphoned from his people should have been used to feed his people and build an empired that alah would be proud of. Instead he looked after himself, his wants, his needs. I wish for the Iraqi's is freedom, strenght, love, and prosperity. Please help those who want to better your lives by giving you safe living conditions or trying to give those conditions to you. As for Europeans in general those who were not with America we would like for you to be part of this great historical change for Iraq. Our differences for how the war came about should be past. The war against Mr. Hussein is done. We now fight terrorism which would be nice if you helped instead of just allowing world criminals to kill innocent civilians in your countries as well as ours.
Posted by Michael @ 11/22/2004 04:05 PM CST
Let me clarify something on my own post. I don't think that killing innocent women and children is necessary for war. However, these people are in a combat zone and if it were me I would flee temporarily until my living conditions were safe. Military members do try to reduce civilian casualties and gave them plenty of time to leave prior to the assault. I hate to see the death of these people whom had nothing to do with the war. I pray for their souls. I assure you that it is not US policy to kill civilians as it is the policy of the terrorists. Let me ask you how would you react in a war time situation it is your life or theirs and they (the terrorists) are booby trapping dead bodies and blowing themselves up.
Posted by Michael @ 11/22/2004 04:11 PM CST
Michael : Yes, oil was one of the reasons and oil was the other one. These guys in Houston do not like countries owning their oil and selling to France or Germany. So they explain these moronic things about democracy and sent there the youth of your country to kill and die for the oil. The most deadly epoch of Saddam Hussein was when USA was his friend in the 1980's and then his thirsty of blood was considered just picturesque. It was then when the graveyards found now where created. On the other hand your army has a lot to learn from IDF. They can ocuppy a populated city without killing everybody as it has been done in Faluya. Perhaps some of the so called "terrorists" are just relatives of children and women killed by americans. Do you know the number of civilians dead until today? I think the main problem for the world is that the public opinion in USA is completely cheated by its media wich give a cartoon image of world affaires. The world is very complicated. Thousands of times more complicated than you can even guess. There certainly are terrorist who must be killed on the spot but there also exist enemy soldiers (Geneva Convention) and millions of people who become fans of terrorism because of Houston guys greediness and its consequences : Abu Graib, Guantanamo, Faluya, Latifiya, etc...
Posted by Aleph @ 11/26/2004 08:02 PM CST
If anyone here is interested in a foreigner's opinion on the Bush / Kerry election outcome...? It's a bit long... so I hope the webmasters won't edit it too much.
Posted by Australian Mark @ 12/21/2004 02:44 PM CST
George Bush and his casbinent are the least prepared set of leaders ever assembled to fight a war. The war was unnecessary anda big waste of money and lives. Bush, Cheney, Rummsfeld, Wolfowicz, Rice, Pearle, Delay etc are a bunch of phony chickenhawks (http://www.chickenhawkcards.com)
Posted by Michael B @ 12/23/2004 04:45 AM CST
Although I am in agreement with this analysis, I would like to point out that the gereralizations of Americans are not true for all American citiczens, or even all Bush voters for that matter. The generalizations certainly are true for a segment of the American population, hovever certainly not the majority. Half of the public voted for Kerry despite his major shortcomings, myself included.
Many conservatives voted for Bush for their own moral or religious beliefs, largely ignorant to the reality of world politics at the moment. The mainstream American media fails to cover international issues adeptly. It is my opinion that biased, lacking and faulty media coverage was a contributing factor to the 2004 election results. Unfortunately the American media is a reflection of the public's disinterest in world issues and it's hard to pinpoint which came first, the chicken or the egg.
Posted by Angelica @ 12/24/2004 04:48 AM CST
Please do not leave notes for MidEastWeb editors here. Hyperlinks are not displayed. We may delete or abridge comments that are longer than 250 words, or consist entirely of material copied from other sources, and we shall delete comments with obscene or racist content or commercial advertisements. Comments should adhere to Mideastweb Guidelines . IPs of offenders will be banned.
Editors' contributions are copyright by the authors and MidEastWeb for Coexistence RA.
Please link to main article pages and tell your friends about MidEastWeb. Do not copy MidEastWeb materials to your Web Site. That is a violation of our copyright. Click for copyright policy.
MidEastWeb and the editors are not responsible for content of visitors' comments.
Please report any comments that are offensive or racist.
Editors can log in by clicking here