Lessons Learned

[Backpacker]

 

Bush has again proven what a liar he is as his cabinet now abandons him right and left. Don't believe the bull about all of them only wanting to serve one term it is just not true. With Powell gone I bet that if the election were held today Bush would have lost his support in the south from black voters and Kerry would have easily won the election. I think every American should question Bush's credibility, even his cabinet doesn't support him, Powell leaves while that idiot Rumsfield remains, that should scare every one who voted for him.

[NJCubScouter]

I agree with what Acco says and most of what boleta says. As for what Backpacker says, I suppose there is little point in expressing an opinion at this stage, except I am not sure Backpacker's point about the cabinet "abandoning" the president is necessarily correct. When I heard about Colin Powell and others resigning this morning, following the others who have resigned in the past 10 days, it struck me that this is pretty extraordinary, perhaps unprecedented. I don't remember an exodus of anywhere near this degree when Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton were re-elected, and certainly not compressed into this very short space right after the election. But rather than them abandoning the president, it may be at least partly the other way around. Perhaps the "old" cabinet was the "team" the administration wanted to show the public for re-election purposes, but now that the president is re-elected, he feels he can bring in his "real team." Therefore, he is asking some of his cabinet to resign to make way for the people he (and/or whoever) really want to be in those positions. John Ashcroft is probably an exception. I think he is part of the president's "real team," but he has health issues and probably is a bit overstressed, having been the focal point of controversy for three years (and deservedly so, in my opinion.) Now that his departure would not create a political issue, he has decided to leave as an alternative to collapsing at his desk one day. Now, the following may be getting into "conspiracy theory" territory, but if a few months from now the vice president is reported to have had another "moderately serious heart attack" and resigns, well you heard it here first. That's not a prediction, just a possibility.

[gsmom]

I guess I'm not willing to fault the Kerry campaign for losing the election as much as others have. The Bush campaign was the lowest and most unscrupulous I have seen in a long time. They took a good and decent man, a real war hero, and smeared him ruthlessly. I'm talking about the Swift Vets ads. Even John McCain called them "dishonorable" and said in an interview that he thought Kerry would make a good president. Bush refused to denounce them, thus lending them credibility. The Navy has affirmed that his medals were properly awarded. Kerry's positions on any number of issues were deliberately misrepresented by the Bush campaign and by Bush himself. Since I don't believe, like some do, that Bush is stupid, I believe he knew exactly what he was doing.

 

It seems that the only way to counter this kind of campaign is to run one like it yourself. It is to Kerry's credit that he didn't.

[JimmyD]

First, bush only gained i believe only 2 percent of the black vote. It didn't make much of a difference. Bush's cabinet supports him. You people need to realize that everyone who is resigning is probably stressed out from all of the work that has come with those positions since 9/11.

 

Bush had nothing to do with the swift boat ads. If you want to compare 3rd party ads why don't we look at moveon.org and their smear campaign against the president. Why didn't Kerry denounce those. How about CBS misreporting Bush's national guard stuff. Both candidates ran a very bitter campiagn towards each other. Don't tell me Kerry didn't. THis election more money was spent on TV adds then there were in any other election. When you have Michael Moore and all the other liberal celebrities representing your party with there illogical views, your going to lose. The Democrats have moved to far to the left and are out of touch with the country right now.

 

I am just so sick and tired of my president being called a liar, he stole the election, this country is a theocracy, he's a terrorist, his cabinet abdoned him, and all this other stuff that has been said on the forums and in the media.

[Backpacker]

JimmyD

 

I don't know where you get your facts but they are not only erroneous but hilarious. Your misinformation regarding Bush's cabinet heads are dead wrong, Powell has wanted out for a long time as he disagreed with Bush most of the time and was humiliated by him in public countless times. Ashcroft, who cares its just great he's gone. As for the rest they know when to get off a sinking ship. Bush by the way got 40% of the southern black vote. Read some papers like Wall Street Week, Newsweek, etc., instead of relying on tv for all your information like most Republicans did.

[Rooster7]

Backpacker, gsmom, and some others...

 

Here's my lessons learned - Liberal ideologues whine whether they win or lose. In fact, they're probably happier when they lose - Because they get to whine even more! Stop calling YOUR President a liar and grow up.

 

gsmom - Bush did denounce those type of ads. Although, personally I think the Swift Boat Vets were very credible.

[boleta]

gsmom,

 

You do not fault Kerry for losing the campaign and in the next sentence criticize Bush for being unscrupulous. Please! This is for the leadership of the United States. It is not softball or for the faint of heart. Kerry allowed the attacks to go without response and did not define his opponent the way the opponent defined him. Kerry basically ran the same campaign that Gore ran and knew in advance that the ringleader would be Carl Rove. There is just no excuse for a failure to define Bush with all of the ammo that Kerry had.

 

 

[LovetoCamp]

Gee Whiz!!!(This message has been edited by Trail Pounder)

[OldGreyEagle]

I asked this question of a few Kerry supporters during the campaign and since the election is over, I may as well try here as I didnt get a response. Kerry said if he was president he would make sure that the US went after the "real" terrorist threat, Osama Bin Laden because he said being in Iraq was wrong. I remmber words along the line of making sure the US armed forces would have the best technology, the best training and the best equipment in the world to hunt down and kill terrorists. Yet while in the senate he consistently voted against the weapons systems he wanted to provide the soldiers with.

 

Then there is the 87 billion dollar appropriation that Kerry voted against. Thats the one he was quoted as saying he voted for it before he voted against it. Now, it was my understanding that part of the 87 billion was for body armor, armor for Humvees and that kind of stuff. During the campaign Kerry then ripped Bush for not having the proper body armor and armor for HUmvees in Iraq. Perhaps it would have been there had Kerry not voted against it. At the very least, it seems odd he was bashing Bush for something he himself voted for. Now, If I am wrong, and someone can explain these things I am all ears. I do want to know how he explained all these things because I never heard the explanation.

 

Oh and during the debate, number 2 I think I could be wrong, maybe number one. Again, Kerry said Iraq was wrong, that is was a distraction. That the US should be tracking down and killing terrorists. Then he bashed Buah by saying the borders of Iraq were like a sieve as terrorists by the thousands were pouring into Iraq. Well, have them pour into a country makes them easier to find, doesnt it?

 

Now, please notice I did not use labels or insults in this post, when you respond, please do likewise. If I did insult anyone, please point it out so I can apologize

[WAKWIB]

OGE...I have had similar results in my discussions with co-workers who supported Kerry. No answers. They seemed (at least to me) to be motivated solely by an intense personal dislike for Bush. That was the only thing Kerry could capitalize on in his campaign. When it came to issues, the Senator continually wavered from one position to the next, unable to clearly define himself. His "plans" were unclear.

Removing Bush from office was their only agenda. One thing that the Democrats (as well as some Republicans) could learn from this is that hatred toward the opposition is not a winning strategy.

[ridinshotgun]

I really wish people would check their facts before they put it out as a fact, such as President Bush's cabinet resignations showing his administration in crisis.

 

Let us take a look at the facts, as gleaned from the mainstream medis sources some hold so dear. Here is the link for those who question the facts, go read them yourself:

 

http://www.lexisnexis.com/about/releases/ResignStory.asp

 

Fact: The cabinet resignation is not that unusual. Let us look at a few examples starting with Ronald Reagan (yes, that evil man that defeated the Soviet Union, thank God). He had all but a single person resign during his two GREAT terms in office. Now let us look at Bill Clinton (no you can't look under that desk). He had 21 cabinet members resign during his two pitiful terms in the oval office. Pretty much takes the cake there for me. Let us not stop there. Jimmy Carter, that gentle peanut farmer from a red state none the less, had eight members resign during his one term in office.

 

So from those facts it would seem that the current resignations do not show a president in crisis. Unless would you also say that about the three examples presented previously, but somehow I doubt it.

 

I only ask that you check your information before you present it has a fact that really is not true but only your feeling. I still believe a Scout should be trustworthy!

 

[Hunt]

A few points:

1. I don't think the Cabinet departures, in general, mean all that much. Powell has been the odd man out for a long time, and it was obvious he would go. Ashcroft's replacement by the more "squishy" Gonzales, however, I think is the first sign of the inevitable betrayal of all the "values" voters who expect Bush to do something about abortion, gay rights, etc. He won't--he'll concentrate on taxes and corporate goodies (just like Reagan did).

2. People who lambaste "whining liberals" for failing to show proper respect for "YOUR President" have pretty short memories, considering how they talked about Clinton while he was still president. Hey, I'll tell you what, liberals should stop insulting Bush when he takes an action that shows he really wants to unite the country. Don't hold your breath.

3. Finally, I'll try to answer OGE's question. First, the idea that Kerry consistently voted against all the weapon systems is something of a canard. Whenever he voted against a large bill that had anything related to a weapons system in it, the Republicans accused him of voting to kill the weapons system, as if it was a separate vote. He also voted for many of the same systems, when they were parts of other bills that didn't have the same issues. I'll agree he didn't go a good job of defending himself on this point (as well as many others). As for Iraq, I don't know why Kerry didn't just say, "Look, I supported the invasion of Iraq because I believed what my president and the intelligence community were telling me. Now I know what they were telling me wasn't true--and they probably knew it wasn't true--so it's obvious the Iraq invasion was carried out for the wrong reasons and was a distraction from the war on terror." Unfortunately, his long career as a legislator apparently made it impossible for his to state points clearly. I don't think he was a very good candidate, and I'm not sure the Dems had a better one this time around.

[NJCubScouter]

ridinshotgun says:

 

I really wish people would check their facts before they put it out as a fact, such as President Bush's cabinet resignations showing his administration in crisis.

 

When you say "people," I have to assume you are not referring to anyone in this forum, because the only person to use the word "crisis" so far is you. Backpacker said, of the president, "his cabinet now abandons him right and left." Given at least three cabinet-level resignations within two weeks after the election, including the Attorney General and Secretary of State, I'd say that's a legitimate way of looking at it. Perhaps it is a bit exaggerated. But it is not contrary to any "facts." I said that this combination of resignations within such a short time after an election is "pretty extraordinary, perhaps unprecedented." I think that is true, and I am looking not just at the number (three is not a huge number, and there have been sub-Cabinet-level resignations as well), but the fact that they include two of the three "highest ranking" cabinet members. Combine that with the proximity to the election. Neither ridinshotgun or anyone else has pointed to any facts that would contradict the terms that I used. Reciting how many people resigned in a 4-year or 8-year presidency, as ridinshotgun does, is irrelevant. We are talking about a very brief period, right after an election, with an Attorney General, Secretary of State and one other Cabinet member (so far) resigning. Except when there has been a major scandal (which I am not suggesting is the case now), when has that ever happened before?

[acco40]

Powell was a non-partisan public servant and had trouble functioning in the very partisan Bush White House. His diagreeements with Rumsfeld and others, his "set-up" at the UN and other things led to his resignation. I'll miss him.

 

Ashcroft retired for health reasons in m book. Abraham - well look at how many transportation secretarys filled out their terms.

 

Many Presidents change their modus operandi when they have no other elections to look forward to. Maybe Bush will become less partisan and go looking for that "legacy" that too many second term presidents look for.

 

Nice post 11/16 Hunt.

[whitewater]

It seems like no one can discuss politics without the discussion degrading into name-calling.

 

It did appear that there was more mud slinging this year than in past elections. It was on both sides as well, but I felt like Kerry was given more favorable press than Bush. I also thought that the 527's on the democratic side (especially moveon.org) were the more viscious. I also think I saw somewhere that the democratic 527's had much larger advertising budgets.

 

I keep hearing democrats claim that the swiftvets were dis-credited. I have yet to see or hear this. Where was this discrediting done? I also thought it was a bit odd that there were 6 or so of Kerry's fellow veterans supporting him, while the swift-vets claimed to have about 200 or so.