An Amazing Speech
Seriously, if you haven’t watched or read it yet, Kerry’s speech was really, really good. Every bit of the speech is quotable, but lemme just point out a few good bits :
Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell. But that was not, in itself, a reason to go to war. The satisfaction we take in his downfall does not hide this fact: we have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure.The President has said that he ?miscalculated? in Iraq and that it was a ?catastrophic success.? In fact, the President has made a series of catastrophic decisions ? from the beginning ? in Iraq. At every fork in the road, he has taken the wrong turn and led us in the wrong direction.
. . .
By one count, the President offered 23 different rationales for this war. If his purpose was to confuse and mislead the American people, he succeeded.His two main rationales ? weapons of mass destruction and the Al Qaeda/September 11 connection ? have been proved false? by the President?s own weapons inspectors? and by the 9/11 Commission. Just last week, Secretary of State Powell acknowledged the facts. Only Vice President Cheney still insists that the earth is flat.
. . .
The President now admits to ?miscalculations? in Iraq.That is one of the greatest understatements in recent American history. His were not the equivalent of accounting errors. They were colossal failures of judgment ? and judgment is what we look for in a president.
This is all the more stunning because we?re not talking about 20/20 hindsight. Before the war, before he chose to go to war, bi-partisan Congressional hearings? major outside studies? and even some in the administration itself? predicted virtually every problem we now face in Iraq.
This President was in denial. He hitched his wagon to the ideologues who surround him, filtering out those who disagreed, including leaders of his own party and the uniformed military. The result is a long litany of misjudgments with terrible consequences.
The administration told us we?d be greeted as liberators. They were wrong.
They told us not to worry about looting or the sorry state of Iraq?s infrastructure. They were wrong.
They told us we had enough troops to provide security and stability, defeat the insurgents, guard the borders and secure the arms depots. They were wrong.
They told us we could rely on exiles like Ahmed Chalabi to build political legitimacy. They were wrong.
They told us we would quickly restore an Iraqi civil service to run the country and a police force and army to secure it. They were wrong.
In Iraq, this administration has consistently over-promised and under-performed. This policy has been plagued by a lack of planning, an absence of candor, arrogance and outright incompetence. And the President has held no one accountable, including himself.
In fact, the only officials who lost their jobs over Iraq were the ones who told the truth.
It seems like every time Kerry gives an awesome speech, the next day he’s talking about something completely different. Hopefully this time he’ll follow the advice of LiberalOasis (and many, many others) and keep the attacks strong. He should just give this same exact speech every damn day (with some minor variations to respond to Bush justifications and to keep it fresh). The more Kerry repeats these points, the more the media will be able to pick out soundbytes that hit Bush where it hurts.
5 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The word “denial” is a smart word for Kerry to repeat. He just repeated it on “Regis and Kelly.” It resonates with Bush’s past character problems – drinking, drugs.
In fact, it occured to me that the entire Bush/Cheney campaign resembles a Stuart Smalley session – endless attempting to seem upbeat, constantly in denial, closing out all negative voices. I imagine Bush sitting in front of a mirror saying, “Gosh darnit, people like me!” It’s that false optimism of someone deeply in denial, fighting inner demons and fear of failure.
Comment by Misplaced Patriot — September 21, 2004 @ 6:46 am
Kerry’s problem is that it doesn’t matter that he feels the President’s judgement on the war has been wrong because it’s been next to impossible to divorce Kerry from the fact that he basically endorsed the war with his vote to authorize the President to go to war. It doesn’t even matter if he had nobler intentions because it makes it either a) seem reasonable that the President was wrong or b) seem like Kerry is a major dolt for giving authority to someone in whom he lacked confidence. Every time he punches, the Bush campaign counterpunches with Kerry’s history, and that is sticking in the public’s mind.
Comment by E-Rock — September 21, 2004 @ 7:36 am
Kerry’s been doing a good job over the last couple weeks of chipping away at the misconception that the only decisions that matter in the Iraq debacle were the ones to authorize force and funding. IT’s not about confidence, but being mislead in the run-up to the war. Here’s the relevant part of Kerry’s speech :
The fact is, Bush treated the inspections, U.N. resolutions, Congressional approval, and post-war planning as mere formalities that stood between him and his ultimate goal of invading Iraq.
It would be one thing if he was willing to say in public what he said privately (”Fuck Saddam. We’re taking him out!”), but he was careful to insist that war wasn’t inevitable, he’d allow the inspectors to finish their work, etc. Once all the roadblocks were out of the way, he gave Saddam a 48-hour deadline and then started the attack. His lust for an invasion was pretty obvious when he reportedly pumped his fist upon hearing the news about the initial bombing.
Bush was dishonest about his intentions and it’s pretty obvious to anyone with a semi-long term memory. Kerry’s justified in going on the attack and if he keeps it up, there’s no way Bush will have an advantage over him on this issue.
Comment by greg — September 21, 2004 @ 10:09 am
The more Kerry speaks, the less viable he becomes as a candidate for President. He is not trustworthy or credible. His is a disgrace to his party, but that’s probably just in Hillary’s grand scheme of things–to have a token Democrat on the ticket so Bush can serve another term and she will not have to try to beat an incumbent Democrat that is a more suitable person for the Presidency. Most of the Democrats I know have told me they are going to not vote, or vote for Bush as the lesser of two evils. The people that I know that have suggested they will likely vote for Kerry are either die-hard democrats, that would vote even for Fidel Castro if he were running on the Democrat ticket, gay/lesbian activists or sympathizers, or otherwise on the lunatic fringe. Mainstream Americans will re-elect Bush.
Comment by Brenner — September 21, 2004 @ 10:23 pm
Specifically, five “mainstream Americans.”
Comment by Kip W — September 23, 2004 @ 5:37 am