1st debate perspectives 10/1/04

I was shocked at first by how scripted the candidates seemed, both of them, but as the debate wore on, Bush appeared to tire and repeat several general themes: “Stay on the offense,” “It’s hard work, everybody knows it’s hard work,” “Flip flopping - he changed his position on the war in Iraq,” and he did so without showing full grasp of the rationale, while Kerry began to take advantage as Bush appeared to tire, and seemed to have, personally, a firmer grasp on his issues, as well as their underlying complexities. By the third or fourth time Bush emphasized the theme of having to “stay on the offense” I began to suspect that his handlers had given him a debate strategy, and pounded it home, that he could also apply towards his strategy of governance. Sort of along the lines of, “Keep it simple, stupid.” It must just be horrible for them, when he’s standing behind that podium. Every time Bush said of Kerry, “He changes positions on the war in Iraq,” I couldn’t help but think we should expect our leaders to change positions when the situation changes. Bush himself has often used the argument that we had erroneous intelligence that indicated the presence of weapons of mass destruction and active Al Qaeda in Iraq, and has defended his actions with the argument that the information that led to his decision to go to war was not correct. Colin Powell was put, by this incorrect intelligence, in a position of speaking before the UN untruthfully, as we sought their support for our reckless and impulsive rush to war. So, here’s to flip flopping, because upon receipt of new information, it’s the right thing to do, the brave thing to do, the honest thing to do! I want a leader who is big enough to admit when we have it wrong, and strong enough to turn the policy around and head it in the direction that’s indicated by the changes in the information and the situation. I have long believed that the need to be right and the inability to admit mistakes is one of the greatest pitfalls of being human, because it dooms us to repeat our mistakes, ashamed to admit them, unable to correct them. Bush suggested that Kerry’s flip-flopping sent a “mixed message,” but I can’t help but think that the real “mixed message” comes when you don’t change your position in response to revised intelligence. One extremely shocking admission on Bush’s part was when he acknowledged that we were surprised by the ease of our early apparent military “victory” in Iraq. He said we thought they would, “stay and fight,” a de facto admission that our military strategists never planned for the possibility that they would surrender, disappear, conserve and regroup as a guerilla force. Our lack of preparedness for this most effective strategy, especially when a smaller force is facing overwhelmingly powerful might, is appalling to me. I want leaders who are prepared for anything and are armed with more than just excuses. I cheered Kerry's plea that we are, "Not to confuse the war, ever, with the warriors," and think that's something that needs to be repeated as often as possible, especially to those who fought in Vietnam and were spat upon in lieu of being welcomed home, brought back one at a time with no debriefing or support, used and abandoned by the Army and hated by their countrymen for their service. I thought that Kerry’s statement, “What is at test here is the credibility of the United States of America and what it means to the world,” quickly followed by saying, “I think we have a lot of earning back to do,” is the heart of the matter in question in this election and sums up our current precarious situation in the world, perfectly. It’s sort of like baseball, when things don't go as planned and the game starts to fall apart. Sometimes, when that happens, the best thing to do is to change pitchers, just for the sake of change, even when it might not all be the fault of the starting pitcher. The change alone becomes the important factor, just to demonstrate to the other team that it's a whole new ball game.