Then, if I might ask, why didn't you provide them the equipment they needed in the first place? Why didn't you admit that this war was going to cost a certain amount of money? Is it really that important to protect your tax cuts (which, from where I sit, have yet to turn he economy around)? Why did you threaten to veto your own bill?
But what are you going to do. This is an election, and I'm sure there will be many rushing forward to tell me that Kerry is just as negative towards President Bush. Personally I think he could stand to get a little tougher. In particular, I think he should take this suggestion from Paul Krugman's latest article to heart.
Can Mr. Kerry, who voted to authorize the Iraq war, criticize it? Yes, by pointing out that he voted only to give Mr. Bush a big stick. Once that stick had forced Saddam to let W.M.D. inspectors back in, there was no need to invade. And Mr. Kerry should keep pounding Mr. Cheney, who is trying to cover for the absence of W.M.D. by lying, yet again, about Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda.
Some pundits are demanding that Mr. Kerry produce a specific plan for Iraq - a demand they never make of Mr. Bush. Mr. Kerry should turn the tables, and demand to know what - aside from pretending that things are going fine - Mr. Bush intends to do about the spiraling disaster. And Mr. Kerry can ask why anyone should trust a leader who refuses to replace the people who created that disaster because he thinks it's bad politics to admit a mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment