If at first your over-simplified arrogant taunts don’t succeed, try, try again:
Terrorists are killing “innocent life in order to get the world to cower,” [Bush] said. “These are cold-blooded killers. They’ll kill innocent people to try to shake our will . . . They’ll never shake the will of the United States.”
I know the President is attempting to sound confident and tough here, but this reads like an invitation. I mean, what is he going to threaten them with that he hasn’t already unleashed? As much as it pains me to help him get re-elected, he should have said:
“The terrorists will lose because they don’t understand what it is they are up against. Look at Spain. The terrorists took innocent lives in order to get the people of our dear ally to cower. But what happened instead? Millions of Spaniards took to the streets in a courageous show of support and defiance. They told the terrorists ‘We will not be cowered. You will not beat us. We are strong. We are Spaniards.” And three days later, in an inspiring demonstration of Spain’s commitment to Democracy, the people of Spain, still mourning, still burying their dead, went to the ballot box and said “We choose who our leaders are. We choose how we’ll live our lives. We choose when we leave our homes, how we get to work, when we vote, and who we are….not the terrorists…but we, the people.”
If Bush were to do what you said he would be a uniter, but he is The Great Divider. Neocons can’t it’s not in their nature.
MoveOn on eloquence.
Bush has a right to be a little sassy. After all, he picked up the all-important al Qaeda endorsement today:
(Reuters) The statement said it supported President Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader “more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom.”
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
“Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilization.”
“Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected.”
(Perfect. Just….perfect.)
“Neocons can’t it’s not in their nature”
One does wonder what the verb was. “Unite?” “Love?” “Lesnerize?” I’ve been tagged with ‘neocon’ myself; I’m quietly frantic that I could somehow also be even more unnatural than usual.
For that matter, one wonders precisely under what circumstances the title of ‘neocon’ can be extended to Bush.
For that matter, one wonders precisely under what circumstances the title of ‘neocon’ can be extended to Bush.
True. “Neo” implies “new”, and Bush is certainly a long-time con, as is Cheney.