It’s Bush vs. Kerry All Over Again, But McCain’s The Story

John Kerry made a speech yesterday in which he tried to make a critical joke about President Bush, and it was worded poorly. In response the Republicans, led by President Bush, have launched an attack on Kerry and twisted his words to imply that Kerry was making fun of 140,000+ American troops currently serving in Iraq and the nearly 3,000 troops who’ve been killed so far in The Iraq War. The charge is so serious that I don’t think the Republicans know what they’re doing, nor understand why this is a loser for them.

The reason is because the charge can’t possibly stick. Any reasonable person is going to realize rather quickly that Kerry was obviously trying to take a shot at the president in some sort of poor attempt at humor. They will realize this once the issue is more closely examined; and the issue has been and will continue to be more closely examined precisely because the charge against Kerry is so serious. This is not like the Swift Boating of his Vietnam record which was about 40 years ago and therefore more unclear and easier to be misinterpreted.

This event just happened yesterday, and it involves events and troops serving and dying in Iraq as we speak; and it’s going to be harder to say that there’s some ambiguity to what Kerry meant. So, if that’s the case then how and why did this joke become a controversy about him ridiculing American troops currently fighting and dying in a war? Who is responsible for using the troops and their feelings for a cheap political trick just prior to a big election?

The answer to that question is damning to the Republican Party and any of its members who joined in this sham. And, that includes first and foremost media darling John McCain who temporarily gave credibility to this smear by coming out so strongly against Kerry. Someone of the stature of John McCain made this a bigger and more believable story, and that’s why he will take the hardest fall as it becomes clearly understood that Kerry was definitely not making fun of the troops. And, this isn't something that will take any reasonable person more than a few minutes to figure out once they look at the context. Pulling soundbites can work sometimes, but not when the charge is this serious that it demands a public trial. That's where the Republicans overplayed their hand.

The President is already discredited, and the last election that will ever affect his presidency will be over in a week. McCain is supposed to be the future of the Republican Party (despite what their base may want), and he’s supposed to be a moderate and an honest man of integrity - or so the mainstream media would have us believe. But, he's just given a glimpse into the side of himself that is more than ready to embrace Karl Rove’s dishonest, swift-boating tactics that appeal to the stupidity and ignorance of the public, and that he’s willing to use the troops as political pawns. How can he ever be looked at the same?

The Bill Clinton Interview

As I previously predicted the Bill Clinton interview, this past weekend on FoxNews Sunday, has created quite a story. Watch it here.

Of course, as can be expected, this interview is being spun in a variety of ways by the media; but through all the spin – on both the left and the right – the most important facts are being lost. Was Clinton too angry? No, but who cares if he was. Did Chris Wallace violate their agreement about what subjects they were supposed to discuss in the interview? No, half the interview was supposed to be open to any subject. Who was more responsible for 9/11, Bush or Clinton? Probably Bush, but this is an argument that neither side can win because it’s not really fair to blame either of them. The blame falls on those who perpetrated the acts, with the cause behind their hatred being decades of American foreign policy in the Middle East – for which Clinton or Bush can only be blamed as much as almost every high ranking American politician over the last 50+ years. To focus too much on any of the above is to distract one from what should be the most important point to be taken from this interview.

Here’s what’s important: Clinton pointed out in no uncertain terms the bias of FoxNews and the recent smear campaign against him, and this can not be refuted because the facts are all on Clinton’s side. The question that needs to be answered is the one Bill Clinton repeatedly posed to Chris Wallace: Did you ask anyone in the Bush administration these questions? The answer is no. Period.

However, once again the Democrats are doing their best to snatch defeat (or a tie) from the hands of victory. They should be all over this angle of the story. They should be rallying to Clinton’s side in this and exposing the free pass that FoxNews, and most of the media, has given to the Bush Administration. Chris Wallace, nor anyone at FoxNews, has ever asked any of the top people in The Bush Administration these types of tough questions about what they failed to do prior to 9/11 in trying to stop al Qaeda.

If they play this right the Democrats can’t lose this fight because their opponents can not produce a tape of Bush, Cheney, Rice, or Rumsfeld being grilled like this with repeated questions about why they didn’t do more to stop al Qaeda prior to 9/11. If such a tape does exist then I’m wrong and so would be any Democrat who took this stance, but no such tapes exist. If they did don’t you think FoxNews and their defenders would be playing them to prove they were being fair to Clinton and that he just overreacted?

So, why don’t these tapes exist? How is that possible? Why were these questions posed to Bill Clinton and not to anyone who was actually in The White House on 9/11? That is the fight the Democrats should be making because they won’t lose that fight. This is where they should be turning the tide and exposing “the right-wing media”, and making this phrase a part of the American lexicon the way Republicans have done with “the liberal media”.

Clinton did his part in defending himself and calling out Chris Wallace on the smear campaign he was involved in. If he was angry it’s because he had every right to be. No Democrat should get sucked into the debate about whether or not Clinton was too angry because that’s how the Republicans want to frame the debate. All they need to do is challenge anyone critical of Clinton’s performance to produce an example of a Bush Administration official being grilled in the same manner. Clinton challenged Chris Wallace face-to-face on this point. That challenge should be followed up on. Chris Wallace said he has asked these types of questions to Bush administration officials. That is a lie that he should not be allowed to get away with. Where is the tape of Chris Wallace, or any other FoxNews interviewer, asking these tough questions to anyone else? If they focus on that question, and on the overall smear campaign, then the Democrats will win. So far they haven’t, and they’re letting a golden opportunity slip away.

Clinton Strikes Back

Tomorrow Bill Clinton will be on FoxNews Sunday on the Fox Network, channel 5 in NY at 10:00am. The interview has already been taped and will air on Sunday, but a partial copy of the transcript has already been released. Think Progress has a copy of it here, and it looks like Clinton really takes it to FoxNews. He does a great job of defending himself and debunking the right wing propoganda that 9/11 was mostly his fault. He also calls out FoxNews and host Chris Wallace for their obvious bias in the way they try to smear him but have given the Bush Administration a complete pass.

This is a must see interview. Bill Clinton is still the Democrat's strongest and most articulate voice. If all the Democrats could speak like this then we wouldn't be in the position we're in today. My prediction is that this interview is going to become a huge story; at the very least it should rally the Democrats and the bloggers to prepare for battle, but we'll have to wait and see...

What Democrats Should Be Saying

Bill Maher was on Scarborough Country yesterday and made the argument that Democratic politicians and pundits should have been making for years. Watch it here; and part II of the interview can be found here.

The Independent Wire has already made the argument that we were better off with Saddam almost a year ago; and this site has also previously pointed out (here) that there's a difference between thinking Saddam might have had WMD compared to going on a Weapons of Mass Destruction Tour around the nation and declaring he 100% had them and therefore we had to invade Iraq.

Bill Maher is simply speaking the undeniable truth. There's no spin involved, he has no agenda, and his arguments are logical and sound. It's a shame that the Democratic politicians can't speak this clearly and confidently about the issues because they have all the facts on their side. They just don't know how to use them. They're like John Favreau's character in Swingers - they have these giant teeth and claws at their disposal, but they don't know how to kill the bunny. It's almost inconceivable, but sure enough for the last three or four years it's been happening. If they could only find the courage to speak freely and forcefully, without checking with polls and focus groups, they could easily destroy that bunny (which is Bush, Rove, and every ridiculous RNC talking point which count on a weak response from the Democrats in order to succeed); and they could start by following Bill Maher's lead.

9/11 5th Anniversary

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority... I am truly not that concerned about him."
George W. Bush, March 12, 2002.