Skip to comments.
Cynthia Tucker: What's scary is more Bush
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^
| 2.15.04
| Cynthia Tucker
Posted on 02/14/2004 4:22:39 PM PST by mhking
By the time NBC's Tim Russert finished interviewing President Bush last Sunday, viewers were either frightened or flabbergasted or both.
Frightened because Bush -- announcing himself a "war president" -- used variations of the words "war," "terror," "kill" and "danger" more than 70 times in an interview that lasted less than an hour. It prompted memories of Cold War school drills and hiding beneath the desk.
Flabbergasted because you may have thought you had been mysteriously transported into an episode of the "Outer Limits." Was it Dec. 8, 1941? Or April 18, 1961, the day after the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion? Perhaps Sept. 12, 2001?
Actually, Bush wants you emotionally stuck in the horrible aftermath of the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. The weeks following the atrocities saw the president transformed into a forceful commander in chief and brought him sky-high approval ratings. With his ratings now down to about 50 percent, he'd love to flytrap American voters in a 9/11 mind-set until November -- which, he thinks, would ensure his re-election.
But the strategy won't work. The president's fear-mongering merely created a strange discordance, since most Americans don't consider the war on terror the most important issue facing the country. A January poll by the Pew Center showed that only 37 percent view defense and security as the nation's most pressing concern. Thirty-five percent list the economy, while nearly 20 percent list other domestic issues as the most important. (The rest chose other issues or none.)
Barring another attack on U.S. soil, the presidential election won't be won or lost on the war on terror. Bush beats the war drum too late; for the past two years, he has spent precious little time enlisting the average American in the war effort.
Wars, after all, demand broad sacrifice; but the president has been reluctant to call upon an America coddled by "affluenza" to make any sacrifices. Indeed, a few weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, the president suggested patriotic Americans return to their routines -- starting with a trip to the nearest shopping mall.
Instead of raising taxes to pay for soldiers and materiel, Bush pushed through a set of tax cuts that heavily favored the wealthy, meanwhile producing a budget deficit that threatens to make America the next Argentina. Instead of insisting that Americans reduce their dependence on foreign oil, the Bush administration went along with granting a tax exemption to small-business owners who buy the biggest and costliest SUVs. Instead of emphasizing the hardships that would accompany an invasion of Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney et al. made absurd predictions about American soldiers being greeted as liberators and an oil-rich nation that would pay for its own reconstruction.
And didn't they tell us we were safer with the capture of Saddam Hussein?
The simple truth is that the United States should be engaged in a grueling, long-term campaign against Islamist fanatics. But that sort of war would likely have entailed an invasion of Pakistan instead of the distraction of Iraq. Pakistan has done everything that Bush falsely claimed Iraq had done: it sheltered al-Qaida, and its scientists sold secrets and parts for making the mother of all WMD -- the nuclear bomb -- to North Korea, Libya and Iran. But a war against a nuclear power like Pakistan may have involved thousands of U.S. casualties. It would have been a real war.
Instead, Bush told us we'd stroll into Iraq, overthrow Saddam, implant democracy and watch it bloom throughout the region -- ultimately bringing peace between Israel and the Palestinians. In fact, the president still says that. (Yet, he continues to fertilize the soil with American blood.)
If there's a war on, shopping malls and SUV dealerships seem unlikely battle fronts.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: fearfuldems; pimpiaschmucker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-85 next last
1
posted on
02/14/2004 4:22:40 PM PST
by
mhking
To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
I've come to the conclusion that Cynthia's just plain crazy.
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
2
posted on
02/14/2004 4:23:20 PM PST
by
mhking
(Machines don't have the right to remain silent.)
To: mhking
Cynthia Tucker makes President Bush look well - so Hitleresque. Its exactly that kind of hate rhetoric that's unhinged the Democrats. Let them keep it up!
3
posted on
02/14/2004 4:25:11 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: mhking
Liberals are such wimps. How'd they make it through WW2 without becoming extinct from fear? lol
4
posted on
02/14/2004 4:25:21 PM PST
by
#3Fan
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1073931/posts)
To: mhking
Flabbergasted because you may have thought you had been mysteriously transported into an episode of the "Outer Limits." Was it Dec. 8, 1941? Or April 18, 1961, the day after the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion? Perhaps Sept. 12, 2001?
It was 9-11-01 Cynthia, and shopping malls and SUV dealerships MAY seem unlikely battle fronts, but they are no different than the World Trade Towers.
Wake up and smell the cordite you blind liberal idiot.
5
posted on
02/14/2004 4:27:18 PM PST
by
tet68
To: mhking
Ya know whats real scary Cynthia? more of you! running your crazy scary mouth.
6
posted on
02/14/2004 4:27:37 PM PST
by
suzyq5558
(The demodemons are ANGRY at the administration? so pray tell what is new?)
To: mhking
They are totally insane, those liberals. Completely round-the-bend bonkers.
7
posted on
02/14/2004 4:28:06 PM PST
by
samtheman
To: mhking
Liberalism is a mental disorder
8
posted on
02/14/2004 4:28:12 PM PST
by
prairiebreeze
(WMD's in Iraq -- The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.)
To: mhking
I've come to the conclusion that Cynthia's just plain crazy.She has moments of lucidity, perhaps one column in twenty. Not this one.
9
posted on
02/14/2004 4:28:42 PM PST
by
dighton
To: mhking
Cynthia:
We are at WAR with the TERRORISTS and they want to KILL us. That means we are in DANGER.
Sheesh.
10
posted on
02/14/2004 4:30:16 PM PST
by
BenLurkin
(Socialism is Slavery)
To: mhking
Cynthia ...."They asked for war, and war is what they got"
11
posted on
02/14/2004 4:30:21 PM PST
by
woofie
( If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried)
To: mhking
"Bush -- announcing himself a "war president""
You can only sell what you have.
The fact that Bush did not stress other things leads one to believe that he thinks this is is best/only selling point.
It might be true, but don't expect him to adopt the slogan:
"The other guy is worse".
To: mhking
I do think she has a valid point about Pakistan. It is Pakistan which is the violent place of religious fanaticism, Pakistan has links to the Taliban (more than links, actually) and Pakistan most definitely has WMDs. Iraq does not fit the bill. I do not understand why, when the Pakistani govt is caught peddling nuclear weapons, they get more aid and congratulations from the US ("they are handling the situation impressively") while we go after insurgents in Iraqi villages.
To: mhking
Cynthia, I think Bill Clinton said it best when he said, "There's no such thing as too much Bush."
14
posted on
02/14/2004 4:30:49 PM PST
by
RichInOC
(...of course, he might not have been spelling "Bush" with a capital B...)
To: mhking
Cynthia is half a bubble off of level.
To: mhking
By the time NBC's Tim Russert finished interviewing President Bush last Sunday, viewers were either frightened or flabbergasted or both. I hate it when these moronic pseudo journalists speak for me.
Hey Cynthia, I watched it and I was PROUD. So obviously, the above statement not only an out and out lie, but pure propaganda as well.
16
posted on
02/14/2004 4:36:31 PM PST
by
LisaMalia
(In Memory of Sgt. James W. Lunsford..KIA 11-29-69 Binh Dinh S. Vietnam)
To: mhking
These Liberals wouldn't know the truth if it slapped them in the face. Which is what I feel like doing to them.
They can't possibly believe what they say. It's not possible for anyone to be so dumb.
I say that, but I know so many people personally who believe the same crap this simpleton is spouting. There is no changing their minds. I simply shake my head in disgust.
To: mhking
No bias there...Ohhh noo....none.
.../sarcasm
18
posted on
02/14/2004 4:37:55 PM PST
by
Khurkris
(Ranger On...)
To: mhking
Tucker objects to the use af the words war, terror, kill, and danger. Certainly, Al Quaida is a terrorist organization that murdered over 3000 American citizens, and will murder many others, if they are not stopped.
We do not have any choice about what we do to stop the terrorists. We cannot get them to stop committing murder, by inviting them in for milk and cookies. The neutralization of the terrorists will require military action (call that war) and killing them.
Of course, there is danger from the terrorists, until they are neutralized.
Cynthia Tucker is so stupid, that you cannot even call her an idiot. The terrorism problem is far from over. It is a war, and we can not stop until the terrorists are neutralized.
19
posted on
02/14/2004 4:42:11 PM PST
by
punster
To: gooleyman
Willful blindness, deafness and stupidity
Prairie
20
posted on
02/14/2004 4:42:25 PM PST
by
prairiebreeze
(WMD's in Iraq -- The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-85 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson