Kerry: “I would have done it differently and fought the war in a more effective manner”. Why is it so hard for people to believe this?
Posted : August 18, 2004 at 2:12 am [America/Los_Angeles]
[via Rick James: Perception is reality]
…you may not agree with President Bush on every issue, but you will always know where he stands..
Rick James (Republican political consultant)
Let’s see. So, extrapolating Rick’s logic, I should be siding with someone who makes quite a few bad choices (that directly impacts me and my family) as long as he sticks by them and does not waver. Thanks, but no thanks, Rick. We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
To me, this whole line of argument is nothing short of ludicrous! It’s as if we’re supposed to like politicians who stick to what they say. Period. No “Let me think this over” allowed. “Come to think of it, I could be wrong” is a huge no-no. By this definition, Sen. Robert Byrd (who vehemently opposed the war all along) and President Bush (who favored the pre-emptive war strategy from day one) were equally brave or stupid (depending upon your personal political affiliation) and all others who had their reservations about portions of the resolution were, at best, wishy-washy.
Personally, I don’t think that the Iraq War resolution was that easy a proposition to simply pick ‘yay’ or ‘nay’ as your choice. It’s not like the US had fought many pre-emptive wars before. And neither had the US Congress faced this predicament of deciding upon relinquishing their powers to the President of the United States many times in the past. In other words, this one was hardly “business as usual”.
Before you start calling Senator Kerry “wishy-washy” (Chris Mathews coined this new term for Kerry on tonight’s HardBall), “flip flopper”, “liar” among other not-so glorious things, I encourage you to read Senator Kerry’s speech on the floor of the Senate as the resolution was being voted upon. If you still come out believing that this man was not thinking straight, was as much a war hawk as President Bush (and his coterie), or had no clue of the issue at hand, so be it. At least, I tried 
Now, to make things interesting, assume that Senator Kerry indeed was as much in favor of going to war in Iraq as the President himself. In other words, had it been Kerry’s administration, Iraq war would have still taken place. With that said, do you think Kerry’s administration would have done the following as well (quoted from Paul Krugman’s The Great Unraveling):
…
The 2003 tax cut demonstrated in an unambiguous way the radicalism of Bush administration economic policy. In 2001, one could have argued that (Bush) administration officials actually believed they could cut taxes while pursuing an agenda of “compassionate conservatism.” But in 2003 the (Bush) administration did something no previous government in the United States - or anywhere else, as far as I can tell - has done: it cut taxes in the face of war. Wars are expensive, and governments usually raise taxes to pay for them. Furthermore, the U.S. government was deep in deficit even before the Iraq war.….Wars are traditionally a time for shared sacrifice; it’s unheard of to cut taxes for the wealthy while soldiers are dying to protect us.
This is not about a (bad and/or hugely controversial) decision that this President and his administration have taken in these last four years. Looking at them in isolation is like looking at various pieces of evidence in a crime scene in a siloed way. Suffice it to say, there’s a lot more at stake than some of these senior political junkies or the negative ads on TV would have you and me believe.
I know all this might be a little too much for a farmer in AL or a mill worker in PA to make much sense out of. I don’t blame them. However, I fervently hope that folks start believing Kerry when he says something like “I would have done it differently and in a more effective manner”. Here’s a little exercise for one and all (especially the undecided ones):
Ask yourself this: If you had the reigns of US military might in your hands and you had to fight this pre-emptive Iraq war, would you have done it differently (hindsight or no hindsight). Think about it and try to think about the whole war including everything that has happened from the time the President declared war till today. If possible, try not to forget Paul Krugman’s observation somewhere in the mix. It might help to remember that while 9/11 (and the war against Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan) was forced upon US, execution of Iraq war was all up to the (Bush) administration to carry out when they wanted and how they wanted it.
I think I can take a wild guess at what your answer is going to be 
- Anand
Category: United (or not) State of American Politics 2004