<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Friday, May 28, 2004

"A vote for Al Qaeda" 

Sean-Paul Kelley (and now Kos) expand on a post by Atrios expressing outrage over the following statement by CNN anchor Kelly Arena:

"Neither John Kerry nor the president has said troops pulled out of Iraq any time soon. But there is some speculation that al Qaeda believes it has a better chance of winning in Iraq if John Kerry is in the White House."
Atrios says,

There you go. We're fighting al Qaeda in Iraq and they think John Kerry is a wimp.
Sean-Paul Kelley adds,

This is your media. Your media has already decided that a vote for Kerry is a vote for al Qaeda and we haven't even had a debate yet. Are you going to let this happen?
The media didn't decide this, gentlemen. Can anyone seriously argue that Al Qaeda prefers four more years of Bush? Come on. Say it aloud, "Al Qaeda prefers Bush over Kerry." See what I mean? Okay, you can stop laughing now...

I understand that these guys are just defending their candidate. They don't perceive him as being a wimp. I don't either. But various enemies of this country have stated unequivocally that they don't want Bush reelected.

It is a simple fact that terrorists the world over want Kerry elected because he's not Bush. They aren't necessarily Kerry fans, but they certainly don't like how the last couple of years have gone under Bush and they assume that their lives will be better with anyone else in the White House. This is not a judgment against Kerry's character. It's simply what the terrorists think. And call me crazy, but I think we should pay a LOT of attention to what they're saying. We ignore them at our own peril.

I am absolutely not saying that a vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorists. But is it too much to ask for Kerry to make it clear that our enemies will be given no quarter by a Kerry administration? Including in Iraq? John Kerry must make sure that terrorists understand that their lives will not improve if he's President. Would it be too hard for Kerry to plainly say that a vote for him will not mean a return to the pre-9/11 law enforcement approach to terrorism that failed to deter attacks in New York (twice), Washington, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania and Kenya? Because we can't afford to go back down that road. And we can't afford to allow terrorists to think we will.

UPDATE: This is one way to find common ground... Atrios is now mad at Eason Jordan.
| |


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

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com


Search Popdex: