<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Two Abes

my two cents on everything

Sunday, August 10, 2003

Reagan 2?

I'm not certain about all these Shwarzenegger/Reagan comparisons, but one thing is clear; Schwarzenegger-omics doesn't have a nice ring to it.
posted by Kara  # 6:51 PM

Sunday, August 03, 2003

I think that many would agree that the internet, satellite tv, cellular phones and other such technology have brought the world together. Simultaneously it seems these things may have detracted some compassion or emotion from humans. This may be one such example from the NY Times website.

Hussein Brothers Buried | Slide Show



posted by Kara  # 5:42 PM

Monday, July 28, 2003

This guy is definitely guilty of something but im not sure it even has to do with watergate.


posted by Kara  # 6:52 PM

Wednesday, July 23, 2003

Dems on Bush

Don't let the title fool you, this post isn't about the left's platform on the hair down south. Rather, it's about how some democrats are reacting to President Bush and his foreign policy and his basic modus operandi. Today former President Clinton came out with a very magnanimous position on the Bush/Niger/Uranium situation reinforcing the former President's title of L.L.B.C. (ladies love bill clinton). Clinton stated, "You know, everybody makes mistakes when they are president," "I mean, you can't make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in awhile. The thing we ought to be focused on is what is the right thing to do now. That's what I think." Clinton seems to be speaking from experience, and you got to respect that. But I just can't decide if he's speaking from the experience of being president or the experience of being caught cheatin'.

Representative Gephardt also had a few things to say about Bush recently. Dick stated "When President Bush landed on an aircraft carrier and declared victory in Iraq, I think he chose the wrong backdrop for his photo-op, If you ask me, if he really wanted to show us the state of affairs, he should have landed on a patch of quicksand." He went on to say "I'm seeking the presidency because foreign policy isn't a John Wayne movie, where we catch the bad guys, hoist a few cold ones and then everything fades to black." I think taking this approcach for the presidential campaign is a dangerous route and I think Gephardt may have lost the John Wayne constiuency with that statement. Attacking the president's proud dufus persona probably won't prove sucessful.

However, another candidate seems to have what may be a much stronger tactic. Howard Dean seems to stay above the fray of simple character bashing by speaking of principles. In response to the war on Iraq and also in response to the idea of representing a people, Dean stated, "Why is it that those in Congress have waited until now to question the intelligence, to question the lack of postwar planning, to question the skyrocketing costs of this war? Why were they not asking these questions and seeking the truth nine months ago, before they voted to give go to war?" "Leadership is standing up to an administration despite the polls. Leadership is asking the right questions at the right time." Although much of what Dean is saying is pointed towards his fellow running mates, he is also making a statement to the Bush Administration, a little reminder to all individual who act as representatives, a little hushed whisper to Republicans, "don't let Cheney strong arm you, you have a responsibility."

When you step back and look at the statements of these three men, it's hard to definitely say that one is more intelligent or more correct than the other. I wonder if they are just simply on different levels of political maturity. Clinton stands from a place of experience, looking back, knowing what the president's responsibility truly entails. Gephardt stands in a place that is a bit muddled, he's caught up, right in the midst of everything, and can hardly makes heads or tails of it. Dean stands from a sort of innocence and clear vision. He can still see what matters and what is important cause he's not caught up in the everyday business matters of someone like Gephardt.

So, that's my brief compare and contrast session. I'm not certain how to end this, so perhaps I'll take a cue from John Wayne and President Bush and fade to black.




posted by Kara  # 7:44 PM

Saturday, July 19, 2003

During the war on Iraq, I don't remember seeing one single picture of an injured US soldier. In retrospect this is a bit bizarre to me being that there was so much embedding going on. However, since the "end" of the war it seems like there is a flood of pictures depicting wounded or haggard soldiers. Many people have jumped the gun on the Iraq War and Vietnam connection, and I really don't believe it's the same kind of situation, however, the American public's perception of the Iraq war could very soon mimic the feelings many had towards the end of Vietnam. These kinds of pictures, to me at least, raise feelings and questions of "what are we doing there?" and "bring that boy home." This war may not be the same kind of war as Vietnam but those feelings certainly are.
posted by Kara  # 8:05 PM

Tuesday, July 15, 2003

The Administration that cried wolf.

In response to more questions regarding the location of WMD in Iraq the AP reports that Bush stated "the United States is working overtime to prove Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded Iraq." Perhaps I'm just becoming overly supsicious, but the words "working overtime" conjur images of Rumsfeld, Cheney and Tenet sitting in a dark room in the Pentagon creating false documents that say things like "From: Africa To: Iraq 1 WMD. signed: Saddam Hussein." Then Cheney suggests spilling coffee on the documents for effect, tattering the edges and Rumsfeld and Tenet argue over who gets to forge Hussein's signature. "You did it last time George!!" With all that work you almost feel sorry for them.
posted by Kara  # 6:43 PM

Thursday, July 10, 2003

(D)-electability

The question of "electability" looms large over the 2004 election and I'm lead to wonder, when did "electability" become such an issue? It's not even as though candidates are saying "I'm a winner" it's "I'm electable." I believe this question of, and intense focus on, "electability" stems from the 2000 election. That election may have had a deeper psychological effect on the Democratic party than has been previously discussed. The result of that election communicated a lack of precision between votes cast and who becomes president. That election also revealed unsettling voting discrimination that the general public had assumed was part of America's past. It almost seems to me that liberals do not want to "get their hopes up" about any one candidate. There is a sort of bunkering down, preparing for the worst, attitude of a lot of journalists. Despite all this I think it'd be beneficial for liberals to look at the situation that lays in front of them for 2004. In 2000 the democrats didn't have much of a choice when it came to the nominee. For 2004 there are a plethora of options before us.
posted by Kara  # 7:13 PM
Ezra Klein over at, the very attractive, notgeniuses.com is talking about what he believes to be a bad move by Howard Dean to try to distinguish himself from "Washington Democrats." Ezra points out that "Washington is exponentially more attuned to the pulse of the nation than Vermont" clearly there is no arguing with that. A recent census found that in the Washington Metropolitan area 1 in 5 adults has graduated from Graduate School and 42% of adults in the area have at least a college degree. This is in contrast to the 24% of adults who hold college degrees in the rest of the country. I don't dispute Ezra's point about the distinct way of the Washington area, but I do disagree with his conclusions regarding Dean's statement. The vast majority of Americans know that they are different from the people in DC and they like that. I think Dean does well by separating himself from the other contenders in Washington. Good Dean.
posted by Kara  # 6:47 PM

my two cents on everything

Archives

06/01/2003 - 07/01/2003   07/01/2003 - 08/01/2003   08/01/2003 - 09/01/2003  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?