Volcanos, Hurricanes and the Debates
by JohnHuang2
The question now is, Will there or will there not be a major eruption? Seismologists believe it's increasingly likely. What worries them is an explosion coming without warning. Have you been following this story? A Volcano Eruption Watch already has been set up. But, needless to say, all the signs are there -- all signs point towards a massive eruption by Volcano Kerry at Thursday's debate. With his sagging polls and No-Show convention bounce, the magma and lava had been building up for months. In fact, last week, you could almost see the magma and lava blowing out of his top, the projectiles shooting out, debris flowing and ash cloud rising as he announced in a New York speech his latest firmly-held belief on Iraq.
Kerry's speech, keen observers observed, marked a turning point for the Kerry campaign, firmly repositioning the French-looking candidate as Michael Moore, sans the 900 lbs. But how big a switch of core beliefs was this for Kerry? Well, back during the days when Kerry was pro-Iraq war, about two weeks ago, after he switched from being anti-Iraq war, about two weeks before that, after he switched from being pro-Iraq war, about two weeks before that, after he . . . oops, excuse me -- getting a bit dizzy here. Just keeping track of Kerry on Iraq is sorta like keeping track of crazy Jeanne, the French hurricane who's been sucking all the coverage from storm-battered Kerry of late.
Kerry now calls the war in Iraq, a country he says is filled with terrorists, a "profound diversion" from the war on terrorists and says he would vote again for this Profound Diversion but not for the funding and noted on the Don Imus Show that "under no circumstances" would he have gone into Iraq and that he stands by his vote to go into Iraq as the right vote for the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time because toppling Saddam had nothing to do with fighting al-Qaeda which is fighting the U.S. in Iraq to retaliate for toppling Saddam whose capture Kerry says has not made America safer and those who believe America is "not safer with (Saddam's) capture don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president," says Kerry, who accuses Bush of having a muddled message on Iraq. Kerry, in yet another dose of clarity, also notes that the capture of Saddam means we've "traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure."
 |
So, as you can clearly see, "I have one position on Iraq," Kerry told reporters last week. (Just One A Day.) Kerry, who denies waiting too late to adopt a new belief on Iraq, said the President "needs to live in the world of reality" on Iraq, "not in the world of fantasy spin." Betting that voters want to hear a dark message on Iraq, Kerry "seems to have kicked the habit of pulling his punches at the last minute and showed a new willingness to mix it up with his Republican rival," gushed Patricia Wilson of Reuters. Nothing appeals to swing voters more than nasty and scathing anti-war speeches on Iraq, experts observed. The nastier Kerry gets on Iraq, the more his poll numbers should rise. Reuters notes that the Kerry staff was "delighted" after the New York speech "at the newspaper and television coverage devoted to their boss's stinging critique of (Bush's) 'colossal failures of judgment' in the run-up to war and its aftermath." (Kerry's plan is to get the spineless French to jump into this 'Colossal Failure of judgment' in Iraq so we can bug out.) The speech, experts observed, gave Kerry, five weeks before the November elections, an opportunity to reintroduce himself and to regain the initiative in a presidential race that Kerry believes should revolve around three major issues: Iraq, Iraq, and Iraq. Top Kerrytistas were said to be "'pumped up'" after Kerry's "aggressive attack" in New York on President Colossal Failure, Reuters reports.
Indeed, after a week of reintroductions and nasty speeches on Iraq, the Pumped Up Kerry has Pumped Up President 'Colossal Failure' to a colossal 14-point lead over Kerry on Iraq, 55%-41%. In the latest USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll, Pumped Up Kerry trails Bush on handling terrorism, 61%-34%, 8 points on handling of foreign relations, 52%-44%, and 8 points in the overall horse-race, 52%-44%. The latest Washington Post-ABC News Poll paints a similar picture, showing the Pumped Up Girlie-man trailing Bush badly on everything from Iraq to terrorism to foreign affairs. Asked whom they think is the stronger leader, 58% pick the Colossal Failure guy, while 32% pick the Metrosexual from Massachusetts (whose message seems to be, 'Sure I've run a crappy campaign and can't even get a handle on my campaign staff, but trust me, I'm the stronger leader!').
Democrat pollster Mark Mellman says the numbers are evidence Kerry is 'staging a comeback,' USA Today reports. "Every poll out there shows a dramatic narrowing of this race," that progress is being made, that the future is bright for Kerry, that there is no Quagmire here. (Mellman gets his campaign updates by fax from Kinko's in Abilene, Tex.)
The upcoming presidential debates? The debates, experts observe, give Kerry, five weeks before the November elections, an opportunity to reintroduce himself and to regain the initiative in a presidential race Kerry believes should revolve around one major issue: Who has a clear plan for the country -- Iraq. But that's the problem for Kerry right there. This election is not just about Iraq. This election is about the broader War on Terror. It's about America and making America safer. Iraq is just one battle in a global effort. The Lefties can't figure this out and that's why Flipper's all over the map. And why he's getting conflicting advice from a badly divided party on tomorrow's debates. One faction urges him to out-Bush Bush. Another urges him to say he can do Bush's policies better than Bush. Still another urges him not to fake it and go all-out for the anti-war vote, or lose a chunk of battleground states where Nader's on the ballot.
And therein lies the crux of Lurch's dilemma. His effort to make Iraq the No. 1 issue, then to separate Iraq from the global War on Terror -- in the teeth of every poll which shows the public sees Iraq as part and parcel of it -- will go down in campaign history as perhaps the dumbest miscalculation ever. The Kerrytistas who hatched this strategy thought they were being clever. They sought to paint Iraq as a war of choice, as Evil Warmonger Bush going after some innocent dictator in a country that had nothing to do with terror, al-Qaeda, etc. Problem is, that Zarqawi guy keeps popping up on TV every time a car-bomb goes off in Baghdad, then people start connecting dots.
That the Kerrytistas would pick the one issue that unites Americans and divides his party -- the War on Terror -- all the while thinking that's not what they're doing on the assumption that voters would see Iraq as irrelevant to terror, exemplifies the profound ineptitude of the Kerry campaign and why Bush is cleaning his clock in polls.
"If the war is going so badly on the ground (in Iraq), as Democrats say, why hasn't John Kerry been able to capitalize?" CNN's Judy Woodruff asked in frustration the other day. In other words, if voter assessment of Iraq is as bleak as Kerry's, why aren't they voting for Mr. Bleak? Answer: Because Americans, unlike the Kerrytistas, don't get 'pumped-up' every time a car-bomb goes off in Baghdad. Americans aren't defeatist -- they're in it to win it.
Small wonder the Kerry campaign pushed to have the room chilled to below 70F for the debates. It was to halt the Kerry Meltdown.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
