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

Skip to comments.

Things a President Can’t Say
The American Spectator ^ | 10/13/04 | Lawrence Henry

Posted on 10/15/2004 1:42:42 PM PDT by mojito

Forget the rest of the conservative commentariat. The American Spectator's website alone, including the letters column, has been full of advice for President Bush on what he should say -- or should have said -- in the first two debates with Senator John Kerry. Truly, you can understand why. Like most Bush partisans, I watch with a certain grim determination, knowing our guy's right, that John Kerry will say absolutely anything, and that the lies and half-truths will pile up high and demand a good swift kick, and knowing, too, that President Bush probably won't deliver that ultimate kick to the Kerry pile of you-know-what.

But consider President Bush's situation -- the situation of any President in wartime, faced with an ad-lib partisan debate. There are far more things he can't say than those he can, because the President actually is in the game of world politics. What he says could fracture alliances, end relationships, start wars. And some of his best ripostes are barred to him because of that.

In two debates, for example, Senator Kerry has insisted that he would eliminate the "nuclear bunker buster bomb program" from the United States' arsenal. Unfair, don't you know. Asking those other countries like Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear arms programs, and then we go ahead developing new H-bombs. Hardly sporting, what? Not diplomatic.

Everybody in the world -- take that literally -- knows why the United States is developing those bombs. But can the President say something like, "You want to eliminate nuclear bunker buster bombs, Senator? What are we going to do about rogue nuclear powers when sanctions don't work? I haven't noticed they're too responsive to talk."

Even implying that threat in a public forum could cause an act of war.

Similarly, when Senator Kerry insists that the United States is ignoring the threat of Iran, or that the United States is "distracted" in Iraq when the "real threat" is in Iran, could the President say this?

"What makes you think we're not doing anything about Iran? We already have special forces teams deployed all over Iran working with the democratic opposition to the mullahs. And we're already at war with Iran. It's a proxy war, going on right now in Iraq."

Nope. Can't say that.

Neither can President Bush make the obvious response to Senator Kerry's repeated accusation that the United States has "turned its back on its traditional alliances" and "failed to bring aboard our traditional allies" in the war on terror.

"What countries are you talking about there, Senator? France, maybe? Did you know that France was bribed by Saddam Hussein through the Oil for Food program, to the tune of X billion dollars? And that France sold weapons to Saddam right through our war in 2003?"

Not when the United States still depends on French cooperation for fighting terrorism in North Africa.

When Senator Kerry slams the Bush administration for a "too few troops on the ground" and "failing to win the peace," the President cannot say something like this:

"Senator Kerry, the Fourth Infantry Division was missing from our forces at the time the war started -- and ended. Those are the forces that would have settled conflicts in Northern Iraq, where most of the trouble is now. Why was that division missing, Senator? Because those allies you keep talking about held up Turkey's membership in the EU unless the Turks denied us passage through Turkey for that division. Those are your 'global test' buddies, Senator."

Can't say it, that is, without alienating Turkey and inflaming already difficult relationships with "old Europe."

Now, either John Kerry knows that he's saying things President Bush can't respond to, or he doesn't. In the first case, he's a corrupt liar; he's lying to the American people about what he can do and President Bush can't. He's had intelligence briefings. He knows where things stand. In the second case, he's plain stupid.

I don't think he's stupid.

It reminds me of the time, during the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment hearings about Bill Clinton, when Clinton lawyer David Kendall questioned Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Kendall asked something based on an accusation raised by Sidney Blumenthal, raised when Blumenthal illegally revealed grand jury proceedings. Starr, whose office was in charge of that grand jury, could not legally admit that such testimony even took place.

Kendall, in other words, had asked a corrupt question. Starr was as angry as I have ever seen him, and recited the substance of the grand jury statute to Kendall. That was all he could do.

As President Bush listens to John Kerry repeatedly do the same thing, it's no wonder his face wrinkles up in a disgusted scowl.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: commanderinchief; debates; georgewbush; johnkerry
An interesting and thoughtful take on some of the frustration that many of us felt while watching the debates.
1 posted on 10/15/2004 1:42:42 PM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mojito
Now, either John Kerry knows that he's saying things President Bush can't respond to, or he doesn't.

The SOB knows.

2 posted on 10/15/2004 1:53:20 PM PDT by evolved_rage (Kerry is a faith-abortionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

bump


3 posted on 10/15/2004 1:54:43 PM PDT by stockpirate (Kerry; supported by, financed by, trained by, guided by, revered by, in favor of, Communists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

I wish Sen Kerry could hear the things I've been screeming from my living room and the driver's seat of my car.


4 posted on 10/15/2004 1:58:44 PM PDT by badmatty (http://badmatty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: badmatty

I was banished to the bedroom TV during the debates.


5 posted on 10/15/2004 2:08:22 PM PDT by JesseJane (~On November 2, keep in mind what mattered most on 9-11.~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mojito

BUMP!!


6 posted on 10/15/2004 2:16:15 PM PDT by bootless (Never Forget - And Never Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: badmatty
Totally concur. There's a lot of things I wanted to hear from GW during the debates - I posted a list ahead of the first debate on one of (my blogs)

"Would someone remind the Senator that he is running for the Presidency, and not Ambassador to France."

"Senator, is that your final answer?"

"Sure, you say that now..."

"Senator Kennedy...sorry...Kerry. I keep getting you confused."

"Senator, does that make any more sense in French?"

"Um...I'll have difficulty responding. That answer was too...ah...'nuanced' for me."

"You know, I think I know what they mean when they say you are 'nuanced'. Back in Texas, we have another word for it, but I can't say it on the air"

"I remember when the media pundits excoriated me that the 'Axis of Evil' countries were not at all alike. They forgot to mention to you that Iraq is NOT Vietnam...and even I know that one."

"The entire media seems to have missed a key point: most of Iraq's WMD program was not _IN_ Iraq - they were in Libya. And we have them. 400 tons of Uranium hexaflouride, hundreds of tons of equipment. We would not have had them if Saddam was still in power, as he would have been under you."

"Senator Kerry, if you were President, Saddam Houssein would still be in power. The legacy of tolerating tyrrany should be not one that America should be willing to accept. Nor, as we learned on 9/11, can it afford to."

"Is the only source you have been listening to about Iraq the mainstream media? Their ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ philosophy radically affects what the American people see. While I regret every casualty, our troops are doing an amazingly good job in Iraq."

---

And after the first debate, I would add "Senator, for someone so nuanced, it seems to escape you that the War on Terror is international in scope. International means across national boundaries. You speak of it as if the War was just on Afghani Terrorism, and it's not. We have to go to the heart of where terrorists find succor - and it's not just a location, we are going to the heart of the ideas that give rise to Islamofascism.

Taking down Saddam and establishing a Democracy in Iraq, right there where God and everybody can see it, means that people can see that it can work for them, and will bring hope for a better future. Iraq, like Afghanistan, is a gut-shot to those who espouse the ideology that leads to terror. Democracy in Iraq will bring Democratic reforms in other countries in the region - a reverse domino theory. And the world will continue to become safer because of it."

7 posted on 10/15/2004 2:18:20 PM PDT by jrpascucci (Terrorae delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mojito

And, perhaps the biggest "I can't say" for Bush concerning why he went to war...Saddam's financial underwriting of the Palestinian bombers on a daily basis blowing up busses, schools, restraunts etc. in Israel for $25,000 each. Israeli unrest was about to set the entire Middle East on fire with us forced to come to the aid of Israel against every Muslim country in the world after Israel struck Iraq, Syria, etc.


8 posted on 10/15/2004 2:18:50 PM PDT by vigilence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrpascucci
Great list.

"Senator, is that your final answer?"

^^^would have to be my favorite

9 posted on 10/15/2004 5:30:58 PM PDT by badmatty (http://badmatty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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