It's nice that the Dem candidates are at least acting as if they care about the vast part of the country between the coasts. This is enlightening though.
The panel was moderated by Kelly Ogle of KWTV in Oklahoma City and Terry Hood of KOTV in Tulsa, who asked the candidates how they would have responded differently following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Each candidate criticized the Bush administration for not involving the United Nations and other countries in the post-war building of Iraq.
Kucinich said he opposed both the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, which he said have further alienated the United States from other countries because of policies of unilateralism and pre-emptive strikes.
�After 9-11, that was the moment when the world�s heart was open to the United States, and at that moment we should have worked with the world community on matters of international security,� Kucinich said. �My plan is to get the U.N. in and get the U.S. out.�
On the other end of the spectrum, Lieberman supported Bush�s decision to attack Iraq, saying, �We did the right thing.� But the Connecticut senator drew boos and hisses from the crowd when he said those opposed to the war are sending a bad message.
�I will say what I believe is right for America�s future,� he responded.
If Lieberman won, I would feel at least a responsible guy was in charge. If Kucinich,(hmmmmmmmm, Bwhaaahahahahah...) won, well Jesus, might as well say what if Ralph Nader won. Beyond the faintest, merest glimmer of a remote snowballs chance in Hell.
Americans can be stubborn, contrary, but not insane. Casting a vote for Dennis the Menace would be like saying you want to be dragged in an alley and sodomized. "Hurt me big arab guy, I deserve it.."
I'm sorry, is my contempt showing?
Posted by Mark Edwards at August 13, 2003 02:38 AM | TrackBack