Bush's Next Battle: How the president plans to take on John Kerry--and how the senator will respond

U.S. News ^ | 02/23/04 | Kenneth T. Walsh

[yhwhsman]

A week ago or so when I saw this picture of Kerry wearing the ribbons on his fatigues I had suspicions it was 'wrong'.

A vet answered my query, that yes it is wrong as proper military etiquette says that ribbons are only to be worn on the formal dress blues. This is just another example of Kerry's disrespect for our nation, IMHO.

[contessa machiaveli]

this campaign should be fought on the issues. i'm not interested if bush missed a few national guard meetings or kerry was in a photo with jane fonda.
the personal sniping won't benefit either candidate..on what's good for the US, i believe bush has the edge.

[Neets]

I found this:

Kerry joined by former Green Beret he saved in Vietnam. Near the bottom of the article it says Kerry also got a Bronze Star.

[jwalsh07]

Adds Dallek: "It's not that Bush is a liar. It's that his judgment is not good. What you're dealing with here is a guy who rushes to judgment, who is driven by evangelical principles."

LOL, bigots by the dozen.

[onyx]

Make Kerry run on his record. That's enough to sink him.

[shrinkermd]

Watching Kerry with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday leads me to believe Kerry will consistently speak on both sides of the issue. Further, he will try to dominate the conversation and fall back on his traditional talking points.

Calling him an East Coast Liberal will not be as effective as anticipated. What needs to be done is point out that, "you can't watch where his mouth goes, but, rather, where his feet go." Focusing on a marked political and personal defect of wanting both sides of every issue (a succesful strategm of politicians)yet voting and acting on a surrepitous, liberal agenda.

IMHO if this is done, he will come unglued. He is not used to any kind of criticism-- especially one that gets to the heart of his devious personality.

In respect to his infidelity, if (as we have been told) the woman says it didn't happen, it didn't happen even if it did. That is the bad news. The good news is that a man who chases a woman 40 years younger than he, has done so many times before and will, many times after. The President and his campaign cannot say anything about this, but there are many other avenues for discussion.

[EternalVigilance]

Yeah, it should be, I agree. But it doesn't change the fact that what I said was true.

Sometimes the petty garbage resonates with the willfully ignorant masses of people more than anything of substance.

I was pointing out a reality, not laying out an ideal.

[chiefqc]

How do you spell toast, KERRY

[BobS]

Nah. I Don't want to see a latter-day hippie as president. And I saw Kerry at C.U. 30 years ago for an SDS rally. I have moved on. Very far on.

[McGavin999]

These guys haven't got a clue what they're in for. That's what is going to be so great about this.

[BobS]

I'm worried. How many assinations do the dems want in order to re-live the 60's? It isn't necessary but they will occur if they push it. I'm troubled.

[daybreakcoming]

very good points. Kerry's own record should defeat him in a heartbeat IF the voting population has inquiring minds. However, if the highest rated tv shows are any indication of the public's mind.....I fear this election. Too many live by sound bites and you have to admit that with Hollywood's help, the demos are professionals at this. Try and debate an elite liberal - all they can come up with is parroted statements they can't even explain so then they resort to personal attacks. And these jerks are going to vote. I read several on the freeper forums unhappy with the President. Well, there's a few things I am not 100% on either --- but hey, what is the alternative? You will wish for your children's sake that you had supported Pres Bush once you have Kerry in office. Mark my words.

[Indie]

PRO-PA-GAN-DA: n ~ "Bush's natural flaws are coming to the surface," says presidential historian Robert Dallek. "He believes the public wants a president who is steadfast, who's unbending about his principles. But the public really wants someone who's realistic, and Bush seems to have unrealistic goals--on the economy, on Iraq. The public actually prefers someone who shifts course if it's warranted." Adds Dallek: "It's not that Bush is a liar. It's that his judgment is not good. What you're dealing with here is a guy who rushes to judgment, who is driven by evangelical principles."

PROS-TI-TUTE: n ~ One who sells themselves for money without regard to morality; adj ~hooker; journalist

[Edit35]

BTW the fraud will be in the air. FReepers need to be poll watchers.

Agreed.

I still contend that the only reason the 2000 vote was so close was because of massive fraud in Democrat-only cities such as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, where there are not even any Republican precinct captains to watch over the polls.

Let's fact it, who is going to stand watch in some of the tough ghetto districts when it's time to physically count up the votes and send them on to the upper tiers.

I know that where I live, there is equality and both sides double check each other's count.

In the deep inner city, I really, really doubt if that check and balance takes place.

[mcgiver38]

http://www.mediacen.navy.mil/pubs/allhands/Jan99/Janpg38.htm

[mwl1]

These guys haven't got a clue what they're in for. That's what is going to be so great about this.

I hope you are right. If the new Bush internet video is any guide, our advertising stinks. The ad is just awful -- it's weak, confusing, and the voice-over should not be a woman. The women we need to reach do not listen to other women, they listen to men.

[Indie]

If the new Bush internet video is any guide, our advertising stinks. The ad is just awful

Agreed on all counts. Someone is definitely "out to lunch" here.