Having been distracted by wonkish obsessions like current account deficits, fiscal bankruptcy and the situation in Iraq, Indonesia and other unimportant countries1, I haven’t been able to keep up with the US election campaign as closely as I would like. But, following a quick tour of the press and the blogosphere, I’ve come up with the following shorter2 (© D^2)version for others who may be in a similar position.
The crucial issue is to determine which candidate has the better record on Vietnam, and will therefore make the better president. As I understand it:
That seems to be all I need to know3. Have I missed anything important?
1 Such as Australia, which is also holding an election.
2 Thanks to commenter Luis over at my blog for tech support on the copyright symbol. Now if I could just do a copyleft symbol! DD points out that it’s been released to the public domain, but I still like to acknowledge him.
3 Or would be, if I had a vote in the election that will actually determine Australian policy on most issues, rather than our local exercise in democracy.
Have I missed anything important?
Yes, you have.
Bush lied about it.
Kerry didn’t.
Trollbait?
The actual issues are an ungodly disaster, both domestic and abroad, with no solutions available that are not painful.
Vietnam as history has some small relevance on character, but mainly since we can’t discuss issues, we have decided to let the election be determined by a two month game of dodgeball.
I realize you are being entirely toungue-in-cheek about this. But the media seems determined to follow this path, and for that I blame the Kerry campaign!
Why? Because it was Kerry who started this whole thing by making his four months in Vietnam the centerpiece of his strategy. The media went along because it, quite naturally, resulted in controversy — and controversy sells newspapers (and TV ads). Plus it is a hell of a lot easier to talk about than the substantive issues.
And hell, it has benefited the Republicans as well. All the storm and fire over a war that ended thirty years ago has taken attention away from the things they are vulnerable on. And they seem to know something the Democrats seemingly haven’t figured out: Your average voter figures that Kerry really was a bloviating glory hog who requested Purple Hearts for scratchs and that Bush really did use influence to get out of serving someplace where he might get his ass shot off.
And your average voter just doesn’t care all that much about either one…
“but supported the war “
I haven’t read any contemporaneous articles that Bush felt strongly one way or the other about it - he always seems to explain his service in terms of wanting to fly planes and doing his duty.
What Jack William Bell said. I watched that convention in complete horror. I kept trying not to think about how the Kerry campaign was throwing the election away, but whenever I did so all I could think about was how utterly vile both parties must seem to evewryone else in the world, so thinking about how Kerry was throwing the election away seemed preferable.
Someone pointed out to me that if every competent adult over whose life the President of the USA has powerful influence had a vote in this election both the Republican and Democratic Parties would be thrown into the dustbin of history. Small solace, that.
This should work: ©
That is: &-c-o-p-y-; , without the hyphens.
Giles, a Harvard prof of GWB’s has come forward and claims that not only was he a less than stellar student but was quite the hypocrite about the war.
What did they do with all the people who remember GWB as a solid citizen, as a conscientious pilot, enterprising student, etc? All we seem to get are folks who remember him as a a coward, a drunk, a boor, a hypocrite . . . .
Per Paul’s point, I ammend my description to “Bush really was a callow party-boy who used influence to get out of serving someplace where he might get his ass shot off.”
And people still aren’t going to preface their votes on these points. How many swing voters do you know that are going to make their descision based on somthing that happened a generation and a half ago? Much less those that have already made up their minds and aren’t going to let a little thing like the facts get in their way.
Let’s face it (and I am speaking as someone who truly detests both parties, and their candidates) the Democrats screwed the pooch on this one. And the Republicans are laughing all the way to the polling place…
The copyright symbol is unnecessary; I released the “Shorter” concept to the public domain a few months ago.
Kerry’s going to win the war in Iraq. But for who?
It’s as though Bush has stepped out of his own carapace and Kerry’s poised to enter it.
Other than masking that fundamental agreement, the reason there’s so much emphasis on Viet Nam, and the jots and tittles of the service/non-service of the respective Bonesmen, is that it’s the only real difference between them.
Kerry’s a rich kid with stones and a conscience, Bush is a rich kid without.
-
Kerry’s current stance appears to be that Bush is not winning the “war”. So the choice is between methods of prosecution. We can smack them with our right hand, or beat them with our left hand.
There are many Americans who no longer believe the US military is in Iraq to serve American interests.
Only, if the US really was wrong in invading and occupying Iraq, that sort of puts the people who were fighting against that invasion, and who are now fighting against the occupation and its residual puppets, in the right.
Sort of, in the sense that resisting someone who’s doing something wrong is pretty much a good thing to do, especially when the wrong that’s being done involves killing women and children.
How about 3 kids and 2 women for every American soldier? Is that a good ratio?
A comfortable number?
For “democracy”?
We need a politician with the profound integrity the moment calls for, who can apologize to the world for what’s been done in the name of the American people, who can separate us from the heartless disregard that’s driven us into this bloody ditch.
I believe they are better translated as:
Kerry fought in war, saw and heard what people do in war, saw and heard what happened to them when they came back, and did something about it.
Bush saw there was a war, didn’t want to puncture his ear drum, arranged a sinecure not uncommon for his class, then blew that off and may have decided in retrospect that he now supported the war.
this has morphed into the current day where:
Bush supports the war without mentioning the dead. (Belle sums up the general result of the war well: “I thought my government was both more competent and more honest than it actually was.”)
Kerry, having expected Bush to choose negotiation and peace and gotten war, supports the troops—and wants to get them out of there as quickly as possible, but doesn’t yet know if this can be done in less than four years.
The rest is paperwork that the White House “had every reason to believe” was “authentic.” {Thanks to Brad de Long and Duncan Black.)
jack william bell nailed it. The other thing the Democrats forgot is that Clinton’s Vietnam record is worse than either canidates and the American people could care less. For the vast majority of people, Vietnam is simply not a national issue anymore.
“a Harvard prof of GWB’s has come forward and claims that not only was he a less than stellar student but was quite the hypocrite about the war………All we seem to get are folks who remember him as a a coward, a drunk, a boor, a hypocrite . . . . “
which paints the picture of a person most people identify with. You paint the picure of an everyman where as Kerry has tried to paint himself as an (unbeleiveable) superman
a law student’s blogging on the topic:
http://mellow-drama.blogspot.com/2004/09/strange-bedfellows-nat-hentoff-wrote.html
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review