From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

<snip>

> So perhaps the outrage is a little
>selective?  Certainly people who voted for Michael
>Dukakis over George Bush, Bill Clinton over George
>Bush, and Bill Clinton over Bob Dole, are in a
>somewhat odd position arguing that the simple fact
>that John Kerry served in Vietnam means he should be
>elected - which is, at the moment, pretty much what
>Kerry's campaign comes down to.

I can see the general thrust of your argument there, but not being aware
of the specifics of the case in point, wont debate that.
 
I think its a terrible shame that the choice of the American President comes 
down to who can puff out their patriotic chest more. Or perhaps more accurately
that the candidates think that it does. I hope and believe that the American  people 
are better than that. But, is it fair to accuse Kerry of being the one who played this 
card first?
 
I think its a bit of a mistake on his part, strategically, to play his game on Bush's 
home turf,
but I guess its a calculated risk, banking on the mood over the war changing. But from 
here,
I see Bush and Cheney doing a lot more trumpeting on about patriotism than most others.
I dont think its fair to blame Kerry for wanting to bring his own cheerleaders along, 
to try to
match it with the home teams chanting. Silly, weak, missing the point perhaps. But 
this is 
politics, and he did not get to choose where it is being played.
 
Andrew
 
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
  • RE: Andrew Paul
    • RE: Ronn!Blankenship

Reply via email to