Electronic Countermeasures

The Roundup

So George Bush spanked John Kerry rather smartly in the second debate. Coming on the heels of Dick Cheney slapping down John Edwards last week, in debating terms it was a pretty good week for the President, who is probably saving still stronger attacks for the third debate than he used in the second: for example, that John Kerry voted against the 1991 Gulf War even after it had obtained UN approval, putting forth his own actions as testament that while John Kerry would talk and deliberate about going to war, he means it when he says last resort: he'll unleash the American armed forces upon our enemies when we pull the keys from his cold dead fingers, or something to that effect.

Couple that with his recent astonishing remarks to the New York Times magazine, equivocating his intended response to terrorism to a prosecutor's response to prostitution and illegal gambling, and suggesting there was some acceptable non-zero level of terrorism which we could tolerate as a "nuisance," and it's been a good several days for the President. John Kerry has been forced to deny his liberalism, however unconvincingly, which will not encourage hard-left types to set down the hash pipe long enough for an afternoon of voting for him. If Kerry has to spend the last three weeks denying his liberalism, even while making strikingly clear his law-enforcement regard for terrorism, which in turn makes clear why he seems to think the war on terror is just the war on Al-Queda, which explains his silly assertions that the war in Iraq is just a major distraction in the war on terror, Kerry is both amplifying and obfuscating his essential beliefs all at once. That means at least we know what we're buying if we vote for the Kerry Edwards ticket on Nov 2, and I'm reassured we won't have 51% of voters willfully ignore facts and believe that the modern Neville Chamberlain really can secure peace in our time in enough states to secure 270 electoral votes for the Massachussets fraud. Will not happen.

Perhaps in some non-serious states like California and Massachussets, and some silly states like Michigania, but if Bush wins Ohio, Florida, and Missouri there is no way he loses overall. The good folks at RealClear Politics, in their battleground states poll summaries, give Bush leads in all three staes, +1.6, +3.5, and +4.0 points respectively. And don't forget that Bush leads in blue state Wisconsin by +5.3, and is tied in the blue states New Mexico and Minnesota. We reach the endgame with something of an advantage.

If you haven't yet read Bill Whittle's Deterrence, you're only cheating yourself. Unless you presently intend to vote for John Kerry, in which case not reading Deterrence cheats everyone else too. Go read it.

I'll make a deal with any liberal out there: if you go read Deterrence and tell me seriously why you disagree, I'll read whatever you consider the most representative and persuasive argument you can find for voting for John Kerry, provided it's not much longer than Whittle, which allows a fairly generous circumference of work. I'll treat it seriously, link to it here for all my conservative pals to read, and post my thoughts on it. Just leave a comment. But the first time I read "war for oil" your source automatically flops into the non-serious pile.

The Wall Street Journal's editorial site, OpinionJournal, features fellow blogger Arthur Chrenkoff providing us a lengthy discussion of the minutiae which are critical to running a democracy, and which happen to be going well in Iraq right under the noses of the persistently negative mainstream media. Check it out, and see why the tide is turning in favor of those who would promote liberty in Iraq.

Posted by JKS at October 12, 2004 03:16 AM