The Great Divide

The Weekly Standard ^ | February 16, 2004 | Fred Barnes

[RWR8189]

The 2004 race will pit a September 10 candidate against a September 12 president.

GEORGE W. BUSH is a September 12 person. John Kerry is a September 10 person. The difference is real. A September 12 person was traumatized by the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001. A September 12 person believes the world we thought existed before the attacks doesn't exist anymore. A September 12 person is convinced the world has fundamentally changed. A September 12 person favors a full-scale war on terrorism, including the use of military force for regime change in Iraq.

In contrast, a September 10 person was outraged by the attacks but not traumatized. A September 10 person thinks the world still exists as we perceived it before the attacks and thus hasn't fundamentally changed. A September 10 person regards the fight against radical Islamic terrorism as chiefly a matter of law enforcement and intelligence. Full-blown military engagement is not required.

The difference between the two types is significant politically as well as substantively. If September 11 and the war on terror are not salient issues in the campaign, Kerry benefits. To the extent they are, Bush gains. At the moment, Kerry has the upper hand. In the latest Gallup poll, terrorism is the fourth biggest worry of voters, trailing the economy, jobs, and anxiety over Iraq. And when voters in exit polls in Democratic primaries this year are asked which of six problems facing America is most important, it usually comes in sixth.

Absent an event that transforms terrorism into the paramount issue again, it will be up to Bush's campaign and the president himself to do so. Bush has already begun, devoting half his State of the Union address last month to terrorism and Iraq. In a speech last week in Charleston, South Carolina, he insisted September 11 "was a lesson for America, a lesson I will never forget and a lesson this nation must never forget....I will not stand by and hope for the best while dangers gather," notably in Iraq. Republican strategists are confident September 11 and the war against terrorists can be rejuvenated as a major focus in the campaign. Democrats doubt it.

I've come up with five criteria for distinguishing between a September 10 person and a September 12 person. Kerry, the prohibitive favorite to win the Democratic presidential nomination, and Bush differ on all five.

The first is how seriously one views the terrorist threat. Kerry believes it's been exaggerated. At a debate in South Carolina in January, he said there's "a long list of clear, misleading exaggeration" by the Bush administration. Bush, however, believes terrorism dwarfs any other threat or problem facing the country. Bush said in his State of the Union address that defending America against terrorism is "our greatest responsibility." It's "tempting to believe that the danger is behind us . . . [but] the terrorists continue to plot against America and the civilized world."

The second criterion is the war in Iraq. A September 10 person believes the war is wrong, at least in the way Bush has carried it out. Kerry says it has detracted from what he calls "the real war on terrorism," which would concentrate on capturing Osama bin Laden. By invading Iraq without the approval of the United Nations and more allies, Bush "is not conducting the war on terror in a way that is the most effective way," Kerry said while campaigning in New Hampshire. The president, naturally, defends his decision to invade Iraq. The liberation of Iraq "was an act of justice [that] removed an enemy of this country and made America more secure," Bush said in Charleston.

Number three is the appropriate method of combating terrorism. Last October in a debate among Democratic presidential candidates, Kerry said: "This war on terror is far less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering, law enforcement operation, and the American people deserve somebody who can lead them to do it correctly and make us safer and stronger in the process." Bush says this policy was tried in the 1990s and failed to stop terrorist attacks on the United States. "After the chaos and carnage of September 11, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got," he said in the State of the Union speech.

Criterion number four: the Patriot Act, passed shortly after September 11. It gave the Justice Department new powers to combat terrorists in the United States. Kerry voted for it, but now claims "there have been abuses of that act" and says Attorney General John Ashcroft has "overreached" in applying it. Bush strongly backs the act as "a vital tool" in homeland security. By allowing the FBI and CIA to share information, the act helps "uncover terrorist plots before they are carried out in America," he said in Charleston. "Congress needs to extend the Patriot Act."

The fifth criterion: how frequently one raises September 11 in speeches and comments. Kerry practically never mentions September 11, except when asked about it. For Bush, it seems always on his mind. His standard speech at fundraisers refers to terrorists as having declared war on America. In the Charleston speech, which was nominally on cargo security, he mentioned the September 11 attacks four times.

Kerry's greatest vulnerability against Bush in the presidential campaign is his Senate record on national security. He proposed, for example, to cut the CIA budget by $1.5 billion. Then, post-September 11, he complained that American intelligence was inadequate. He has voted against both offensive and defensive weapons systems for the military. He has voted to cut the defense budget. The list of Kerry's anti-military, anti-CIA positions is a long one. But these won't matter particularly unless September 11 and the war on terrorism become the context for the presidential race. For now, battling terrorism seems merely one of several issues and not the most important of them. It's a political environment in which a September 10 person could be elected president.

Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.

[nathanbedford]

Thanks.

[MissAmericanPie]

If he hinges his campaign on the WOT he will lose. He has only enraged the voting populace every time he and Rumsfield said, "Everything possible is being done to protect you", while our borders remain wide open and makes a lie out of that statement. Anyone that can believe that the red area of the map was not offended by Ramadan at the Peoples House is completely out of touch.

He is perceived as ready to throw down American sovereignty, ready to continue to injure the American citizen in his pocketbook, his heritage, culture, and continued existance as the majority in his own nation via unrestrained invasion. That's not going to stand.

He has spent like a drunken sailor and rather than on programs the voter base can get behind, he fritters our money away on liberal agendas and trips to the moon. If he is to win he needs to make a dramatic course change. Deport, inforce, and stop talk of citizenship for the lawless stranger. There are far more voters at the polls upset about illegal immigration than there are Mc Donalds managers upset about deportations.

He needs to back off sending 34 billion to Mexico and use that SS money to allow veterans to receive both SS and disability. His first week in office I warned that he better dance with the one that brung him, maybe Fox News picked that up because it has been around the news circuit, he should have. Now he's in the position of trying to drive home his date for the dance after having ignored and abandoned her all evening while still expecting a kiss instead of a kiss off at the front door.

It's not too late to turn it around but I suspect he won't and that's a shame. Bush bears sole responsibility of putting the Republican Party and the conservative citizen in the position of possibly facing more demonrat damage and loss of seats in the house and senate. They should engage in some arm twisting, because I don't see any indication on his part that he has any intention of throwing his base any bones, he must really hate conservatives for that to be the case.

It's not smart to let them suspect that right before an election.

[nathanbedford]

I agree entirely with your sentiments about immigration.

But I believe that his stand on this issue and his profligate spending are symptoms of his political character. Bush is not really a conservative but a Christian. He animated by a family sense of loyalty on a personal basis but not necessarily to political party. He is motivated by a family duty toward service to the nation but not to a conservative philosophy. There is Noblesse Oblige but not partisan fire in the belly. There is a torch to carry to redeem his father but not to fight for conservative principles. To the degree that he is conservative it is derivative – it flows from his epiphany but it is not the original energizing force in his life.

[RWR8189]

Bush did not get the bounce which historically has automatically flowed to presidents after the State of the Union speech.

There usually isn't such a bounce.

Does the State of the Union Affect Presidential Popularity?

[MissAmericanPie]

Very insightful, but his Christianity is the messed up kind that is promoted from Satans men in the pulpit now days. It's not very deep. He holds very stubbornly to his flawed views. The views he holds on free trade and globalism will prove a disaster..more than that, I don't want him to go down in history as the President that killed the nation status of the USofA.

No secret is made by globalist think tanks and those that promote their nutty ideas, that they believe nations are an entity whose time has come and gone as they attempt to erase any distinction between one country and another.

Their goal is global democracy, not constitutional republics and people need to stop fooling themselves that they are on the same page as these people. That no politician would actually void the sovereign borders of the USofA or place us under international law. Because that is the exact aim of elements of both parties.

[nathanbedford]

Thanks for that information. I was thinking of Slick's success after Drudge blew the lid off Monicagate.

Frankly, I am surprised at these data because I was watching Hume's panel tonight and they were talking about the traditional bounce missing after Bush's speech.

So now Bush will be painted a loser because he failed to meet fictitious expectations. The vicious spiral goes on.

[rock58seg]

Proof positive that Texans have a better memory than most Democrats, or the NYC council for that matter. After 168 years we still remember the Alamo. In slightly more than two years they have forgotten 9/11.

Thank God Bush was/is our President through this period of danger. I will reward him for a job well handled in November, with my vote.

[NYCVirago]

no one seems to be picking up on a point that I think should really be stated more...bush is a victim of his oen success. terrorism is no longer a big issue, because bush has been successful in keeping it from our shores for over 2 years.

You've hit the nail on the head. I hope some of the campaign commericals talk about that.

[MEG33]

re Bush:"His Christianity is the messed up kind...It's not very deep".

I am simply astonished at your pretentious judgment of his faith.

[MissAmericanPie]

Why would you be? He said himself he is a babe and not well versed.

[MEG33]

Matthew 7:1-5

[q_an_a]

Here is a link that is needed to be watched as you consider what Fred Barnes said. Copy and paste into a new window of your browser.

http://www.gunstuff.com/america-attacked.html

[MissAmericanPie]

Mt 7:20

[MEG33]

#29

[Hat-Trick]

If Kerry is elected in November, it will be proof positive that most American voters are dumber than tree stumps.

This has already been proven by the election and re-election of Bill & Hillary Clinton. It will, however, be proof that the majority of voting citizens have very short memories and aren't getting any smarter. Regards,

Hat-Trick