Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WSJ's editorial: A President's Job
Wall Street Journal ^ | March 26, 2004 | WSJ Editors

Posted on 03/26/2004 11:45:59 PM PST by nikola

Edited on 04/22/2004 11:51:22 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Give President Bush's critics credit for versatility. Having spent months assailing him for doing too much after 9/11 -- Iraq, the Patriot Act, the "pre-emption" doctrine -- they have now turned on a dime to allege that he did too little before it. This contradiction is Mr. Bush's opportunity to rise above the ankle biting and explain to the American public what a President is elected to do.


(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911commission; bush43; bushdoctrine; bushdoctrineunfold; preemption; prewarintelligence; wmd; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
I couldn't have said it any better myself. Finally an objective review of President's actions!
1 posted on 03/26/2004 11:46:00 PM PST by nikola
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nikola
Great read, Thanks for posting it :-)
2 posted on 03/26/2004 11:59:58 PM PST by MJY1288 (When Faced With a Choice as Simple as Night or Day, John Kerry Chooses Dusk and Dawn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
Its not ankle-biting, they are too low for that.. they are toe-nipping
3 posted on 03/27/2004 12:04:03 AM PST by GeronL (Freep, Freep........ Freeping to the Oldies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
As the 9/11 hearings reveal, there are always a thousand reasons for a President not to act.

Exactly.

For everything that a President does do, there will be a chorus of people asking why something else wasn't done instead, or also.

-PJ

4 posted on 03/27/2004 12:06:24 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's not safe yet to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola; Grampa Dave; BOBTHENAILER; NormsRevenge; Howlin; onyx; Brad's Gramma; blam; McGavin999; ...
In Iraq, the burden was on Saddam -- a proven supporter of terrorists, user of WMD and enemy of America -- to show he had destroyed the weapons we know he once had. He didn't, and so Mr. Bush acted to protect America and prevent another September 11.

Absolutely!!!

The President should have another 4 years to continue his protection plans!

5 posted on 03/27/2004 12:23:33 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
Bravo to the writers!.Thank you for posting it.
6 posted on 03/27/2004 12:23:39 AM PST by MEG33 (John Kerry's been AWOL for two decades on issues of National Security!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
"We likewise support Mr. Bush's antiterror leadership, despite the inevitable missteps of planning or WMD intelligence. Whatever lapses may have occurred in the eight months of his Presidency before 9/11, since that day Mr. Bush has had the courage to act, and forcefully. He has turned 20 years of antiterror policy on its head, going on offense by taking the war to the terrorists, toppling state sponsors in Afghanistan and Iraq, and now attempting to "transform" the Middle East through a democratic beachhead in Iraq. This is leadership."

The Wall Street Journal is setting a new standard in clear-thinking statesmanship. It's also breaking new ground in laying the philosophical framework for a New American Century. I suspect some PhD thesis twenty years from now will draw heavily on the WSJ's editorials appearing now, as he writes about the early intellectual underpinnings of the American hyperpower.

That's what we're talking about here, folks. The war on terrorism is critically important, no question about it. It's a matter of life or death for the West. But what the Bush administration is setting in motion breaks the mold in the conduct of international relations as it has been since 1945. This is why we're hearing so many screams of outrage from the Euros and others, and especially those countries which long ago fixed their foreign policy to the UN. The US, under Bush, is saying "We're scrapping the post-1945 system and embarking on a course of enlightened self-interest -- and there's nothing you can do about it." The really interesting thing is how many countries are eager to cast their lot with us. You don't hear much publicity about that, but I can tell you, as a State Department officer, that it's there and it's real.

What's at stake in the 2004 election is nothing less than the future of America's place in the world. The Bush model is off to a smashing start, with two huge successes (Afghanistan and Iraq -- and don't let anyone tell you Iraq is a failure; just how successful it is will only become apparent with time). In my humble opinion, it would be a national tragedy if the Bush model were to be stopped in mid-stream by a Kerry victory this November. Bush needs four more years to cement the new US approach into place -- and the WSJ is telling everyone, in very plain words, why.
7 posted on 03/27/2004 1:36:23 AM PST by Poundstone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
Good Post. Thank you.
8 posted on 03/27/2004 3:01:17 AM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poundstone
We certainly can use "clear thinking Statesmanship." The question is, "How much of this truthful information will filter down to the "lowest common denominator," to use Mr. Kerry's phrase. Clark and his cronies are using a "sleigh of hand" to throw up around our President a perception which confounds medical researchers, for example. It is the problem of separating the "association" of one thing with another to the "causation" of some kind of event. For example, I have developed vitreous detachment in one of my eyes and I immediately searched my mind to think of what I had done different in my life a couple of weeks before the event. Was it the new face cream I was using or that new nutritional supplement I began taking? I asked my Dr. about those things and she was able to immediately describe to me that those were mere associations with that event and certainly not the cause. Our President was associated with the horrible events of 9-11 because of his office. He was not the cause any more than my face cream was the cause of my eye problem. However, I now have to deal with the problem and to be very vigilent for further problems. No one event caused 9-11..It was a series of events which built up to the opportunity for the terrorists to do what they did. The causes go back a long time and I would guess to the gutting of our CIA and Intelligence Departments. As I recall, the liberals did that. This nations needs to do some soul searching to find what we did wrong and to reverse those actions which made us vunerable. It is easy to tear down structures. It is very difficult to rebuild them. Much of the expertise which existed back in the 60s and 70s when so much was destroyed in our government, is gone. And, here we are with a President trying to protect our nation who is being attacked by some who are so blinded by their own ambition that they cannot consider the state of security for our nation. My poor husband, suffering from throat cancer, is more upset everyday over what is happening in our nation than what is happening in his body.
He is a true Statesman!
9 posted on 03/27/2004 3:05:15 AM PST by jazzlite (esat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
If we had preemptively bombed one of the countries harboring terrorists prior to 9/11, wouldn't Congress have had to approve a resolution or something?

So if we could barely get the Dumbocrats to support going into Iraq AFTER 9/11. how in the world would they have been supportive PRIOR to 9/11?

That whole premise is ridiculous since they would never have gone along with it in the first place.

10 posted on 03/27/2004 3:09:04 AM PST by IrishRainy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IrishRainy
RIGHT ON.....That's the whole point that needs to be shouted from the mountaintops!!!
11 posted on 03/27/2004 3:14:52 AM PST by CMailBag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Poundstone; Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is an excellent summary of the situation, and why we must re elect our president:

The war on terrorism is critically important, no question about it. It's a matter of life or death for the West. But what the Bush administration is setting in motion breaks the mold in the conduct of international relations as it has been since 1945. This is why we're hearing so many screams of outrage from the Euros and others, and especially those countries which long ago fixed their foreign policy to the UN. The US, under Bush, is saying "We're scrapping the post-1945 system and embarking on a course of enlightened self-interest -- and there's nothing you can do about it." The really interesting thing is how many countries are eager to cast their lot with us. You don't hear much publicity about that, but I can tell you, as a State Department officer, that it's there and it's real.

What's at stake in the 2004 election is nothing less than the future of America's place in the world. The Bush model is off to a smashing start, with two huge successes (Afghanistan and Iraq -- and don't let anyone tell you Iraq is a failure; just how successful it is will only become apparent with time). In my humble opinion, it would be a national tragedy if the Bush model were to be stopped in mid-stream by a Kerry victory this November. Bush needs four more years to cement the new US approach into place -- and the WSJ is telling everyone, in very plain words, why.

12 posted on 03/27/2004 7:58:49 AM PST by Grampa Dave (America can't afford a 9/10 John F'onda Kerry after 9/11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave; Travis McGee; archy
I agree, I agree. Faster, please -- as Ledeen often says. Before it's too late.
13 posted on 03/27/2004 8:28:20 AM PST by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nikola
But the failure to act without "definitive" evidence and "foreign" agreement might also encourage the terrorists to think that they can get away with it and so hit us again.

There's nothing conditional about it. That's exactly what Toon's response in Somalia did. And what his inaction after every other attack did. And what will happen again if Kerry's elected. It will be open season. Or does anyone think Hamas backed down, at least publicly, after that last threat out of the goodness of their non-existant hearts?

14 posted on 03/27/2004 8:32:23 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"The President should have another 4 years to continue his protection plans!"

Let's initiate a repeal of the XXII amendment and REALLY get the libs stirred up!

15 posted on 03/27/2004 8:46:01 AM PST by Thom Pain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nikola; *Bush Doctrine Unfold; Libertarianize the GOP; seamole; nwrep; TastyManatees; Timesink; ...
fyi
16 posted on 03/27/2004 8:54:01 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thom Pain
We don't need an emperor to rule us. We just need the second amendment enforced.
17 posted on 03/27/2004 9:07:45 AM PST by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poundstone
but I can tell you, as a State Department officer

Thanks (and condolences).

So, how is Powell doing so far as reform and controlling insubordination, compared to, say, Shultz (as a successful historical example)?

Feel free to ignore the question if answering would be unwise or compromising.

18 posted on 03/27/2004 11:03:44 PM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nikola
bump
19 posted on 03/27/2004 11:13:08 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikola
Thank you for this post. This should be MANDATORY reading for every American.
20 posted on 03/28/2004 12:02:12 AM PST by SpyderTim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson