Received the following comments from Keith:
I find it really interesting that for the first time the administration is
in the position of making a three sentence argument. For five years they
have successfully justified almost every action by simply saying ‘ 9/11′ ,
‘war on terror’ while the opposition needed to explain WHY violating
individual civil liberties, invading Iraq, spending like crazy might not be
the best course of action in pursuing our enemies. It’s been my theory
since the ‘04 election that most of the electorate are incapable of
understanding a reasoned argument beyond a one sentence sound bite. I
happen to agree with the administration on this one, but find it fascinating to watch the Dems throw the ‘9/11′ stuff back at Bush and watch him try to make a three sentence rebuttal that stands NO chance of political acceptance.
Just a thought.
Add Jim to your del.icio.us network
Very good point. I almost agree with BushCo when you consider that 80% of our port terminals are already operated by foreign-owned companies, including some from China. But to say there’s no difference b/w the UK and the UAE is ridiculous. I think it’s mostly a tempest in a teacup compared to real issues of port and homeland security but that Dems and Republicans have both siezed upon the issue because it evokes such a visceral response in polls. Dems want to bash Bush (as do I) and Repubs want to distance themselves from BushCo’s horrible, horrible track record that have, among other atrocities, fomented civil war in Iraq, furthering instability in just about the most unstable place in the world.
ky