We just can't do what we have to do to win.

[Guaranteed]

So many of you are going to hate me for this, but I don't know what else to say.

In order to win, we have to beat Bush on the terrorism issue. Whether we like it or not, this IS a dick-measuring contest. Tweety was just talking about this, wondering why, for example, Edwards was talking a lot about economic and healthcare issues instead of focusing nearly exclusively on the war on terror last night in Ohio. We needed to rebut the Bush administration extremely forcefully at that point, and the Kerry campaign just doesn't seem to want to get that far into it. They're certainly far from wanting to surround themselves with it, like the Bush administration wants to do.

Anyway, in order to beat Bush on this issue we have to ram it down people's throats that invading Iraq was a detriment to our world standing and to our war on terrorism. This is THE winning strategy. *There is no other way to beat him.* The war on terror trumps all other issues as far as the public is concerned, and we HAVE to, absolutely fucking HAVE TO, show that what Bush has done HAS NOT BEEN IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES.

The problem is that Kerry can't do this without contradicting himself. His IWR vote just totally screws him. He maybe could say that we didn't work with the world in the way that we could have, but most other countries simply were not in favor of this invasion. They knew it was bullshit through and through, just like the rest of us did. I saw Clark talking to Wolf Blitzer last night, and the second Clark even mentioned Iraq Blitzer came back with the damned IWR. It's no-win. However we respond, it just doesn't have the power that we need behind it. We need to be able to WRAP ourselves in the issue, make it the cornerstone of our campaign, and it just doesn't seem like we can do it.

What the hell can we do about this? It's our central problem. I've been racking my brain trying to figure a way for Kerry to approach this that wouldn't be left open to the IWR vote response, but I just don't see it.

Can this be done? Anyone have any ideas?

[lil-petunia]

1. we agree

strongly.

At least Lockhart is back in the saddle again.
might put some reality and common sense in the leadership of his campaign. the sooner the better.

[Skuk]

2. How many

more Americans will have to die before the war on terror is over?

surely there must be a better way of handling things.

[Guaranteed]

3. I don't object to Americans dying

(although I'm saddened by it) if they're fighting people who actually attacked us.

[Skuk]

18. but

we arent fighting the people who attacked us... we dont even know who really is responsible!!!

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. You say...I agree with the president that we should be tough on terror

so I gave the president my vote to be tough on terror based on the facts he presented. If I knew what I know now, I would still give the president my vote because he gets security briefings every morning that I don't...it isn't my fault that he cooked the books and lied..

just like he cooked the books on the medicare bill, just like he cooked the books on the economy and just like he cooked the books on energy.

Same thing with the 87 billion. I voted for the version of the bill that accounted for the 87 billion being recouped from SOMEWHERE. The president said he wouldn't sign it. I didn't vote for the bill wherein the president had no accountability. 87 billion doesn't grow on trees.

[Guaranteed]

5. Bush just blames it on the CIA, though.

And, in saying that, Bush becomes no more "responsible" for the Iraq invasion than Kerry.

We have to impugn his motives, and show his reckless DISREGARD for the security of the American people. We can't allow him to just say that he made a mistake, because he lumps Kerry straight in with him.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

6. Nope..his admin used those 16 words even after CIA said no

Bush can't have it both ways either...he can't believe the CIA when they tell him what he wants and then say they're wrong when he is caught lying.

[Guaranteed]

9. Right, there were a couple of blatant things, of course

but that's not enough to separate the two of them. It's not enough unless Kerry is able to quote Richard Clarke verbatim while still being consistent in tone and substance.

The second Kerry can feasibly make that line the centerpiece of his campaign is the second he will WIN.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. Well all I am saying is that Kerry can knock Bush down on this

I supported you. This is YOUR fuckup. 1000 troops aren't dead because I gave you my vote. 1000 troops are dead because you wouldn't listen to the experts and let this war be planned by people in your admin such as Perle and Wolfowitz who used their phony cronies to claim the Iraqi's would not resist. Many many military experts warned that would not be the case on the ground. You are not resolute. You don't listen to anything but what you to hear.

[bobbyboucher]

7. "Bush was asleep at the switch".

He didn't lift a finger to prevent 9/11. Of course we all know it is much more insidious than that, but he literally didn't lift a finger.

Document their inaction. It is astounding.

[Guaranteed]

10. They'll just shift it over to Clinton

even though the Clinton administration warned them SEVERAL times.

On edit: It's gotta be about Iraq some way or another, because Bush has to OWN it.

I don't think the allowing 9/11 thing will fly...it's just that none of us could comprehend the possibility of it (even with the warnings).

And just no one is going to buy MIHOP. I'm sorry...that'd be the quickest way for Kerry to lose, really.

[bobbyboucher]

15. I didn't say allow,

I said he didn't protect the nation. The buck stops right on his desk. Document it if you have to, it is easy. It goes something like this:

"You pundits and polls keep saying Bush is great in the war on terror, because you think 9/11 doesn't count. But 9/11 does count, it was George Bush's job to defend the nation, and on his watch, 3000 people were slaughtered, and all he has done is pass the buck."

Repeat.

It's easy to document their failures and lapses. They had warnings. They had Hart/Rudman (Chimp didn't read), Prostitutes in New Orleans, etc. etc. etc.

Bush owns 9/11 too.

[Guaranteed]

16. You know what,

you're absolutely RIGHT about that.

When those fuckers say we can't wait to attack until after they do because they already DID (which they said at least twice during the convention...I think Cheney and Pataki said it) that's exactly what we need to respond with.

You're right, they did attack. And they attacked under HIS watch, and HE let them.

This is an excellent point.

On edit: Yeah, you've hit on something so simple, yet just so fucking true. ********These guys talk so much about protecting our country, yet look what they allowed to happen.**********

I say send it off to Kerry. This is a brutal (and risky) attack, but I say fuck it. Nail 'em with it.

[CarolynEC]

24. Excellent...

... you've summed it up perfectly:

"You pundits and polls keep saying Bush is great in the war on terror, because you think 9/11 doesn't count. But 9/11 does count, it was George Bush's job to defend the nation, and on his watch, 3000 people were slaughtered, and all he has done is pass the buck."

[TheRovingGourmet]

43. WTC Attack I, Waco, Oklahoma City, Kobar Towers, Cole...

[CarolynEC]

49. Small-scale attack with suspects arrested, religious nutcases...

... domestic right-wing extremists with suspects arrested, overseas, suspects identified just weeks before Bush took over and yet no action...

In other words, save yer breath.

[TheRovingGourmet]

50. Small scale?

[brentspeak]

11. Kerry should be harping on this issue everyday

All he has to do is point out the thirty-day vacation Bush took prior to 9/11. Kerry can create a contrast by assuring the public that America won't have to worry about the captain being asleep at the wheel as long as he (Kerry) is president.

There should be billboards upon billboards all over the country featuring scenes of Bush lounging around his Texas ranch in the month of August,2001.

[brentspeak]

8. My idea

and I can't say it's a great one, because Kerry has put himself into a corner with how he's voted and how he's explained himself:

Kerry should say something along the lines of "If any other president were in office, I would still vote for the IWR even if I knew then what I know now about the WMD. 'Any other president', that is, certainly not President Bush. He betrayed the trust bestowed upon him by the Congress, and he betrayed the American people."

[Guaranteed]

12. I think it was MikeG...some Mike..

that had the idea of making commercials featuring tape of Bushisms with a laugh track over the top of them...LOL I LOVED that idea.

We could try just straight ridiculing this guy. It could gain us a couple of points, but it probably wouldn't win it for us.

[Merlin]

14. Absolutely! We must mercilessly DESTROY Bush's rep as a "Tough" leader.

We must tear the son of a bush to shreds as a "wartime President" and a "tough leader" by attacking him relentlessly for his utter incompetence.

Clinton put it well Monday in Pittsburg. He said something like: "You know, it was Osama Bin Laden who attacked America on 911, and he's holed up in Afghanistan. Sadam Hussein and Iraq didn't have anything to do with 911. So doesn't it seem odd that we have 20,000 troops in Afghanistan and 120,000 troops in Iraq?

That fact alone OUGHT to be able to penetrate the psyche of Joe Sixpack. Maybe that's awfully optimistic, but it's all we have.

BullGoose, we need to keep this thread and others like it going daily from here on out. You are right on target. It is essential.

[Guaranteed]

17. And imagine Kerry signing off on all of his speeches with

"WHERE'S OSAMA????!!!!" with the crowd.

[Arkana]

36. Get Ann Richards back!

"Where was GEORGE?????" :D

[Yavin4]

19. We Need To Tie In What's Happening In Russia To Bush's Failures

Bush has told us that taking out Saddam has made the world safer, but it hasn't. Spain was attacked, and now, there's a horrible terrorist attack in Russia. Bush's war in Iraq has distracted us from taking out Al Qeda. In fact, it's made Al Qeda even stronger.

Kerry needs to emphasize that we are not winning the war on terror.

[quaoar]

20. If you try to show that the war is immoral

You will lose. Not because you are wrong -- because more than 50% of the voters disagree.

You must instead show that Bush's handling of the war has been incompetent -- that he has caused the needless deaths of American soldiers because of his lack of planning, his lack of understanding of military realities and his refusal to listen to the sound advice of his generals.

[Guaranteed]

25. I'm not sure if you're referring

to the war on terror or the war in Iraq, there...but, in any case, the war in Iraq wasn't just immoral, and it's certainly not the way in which we want to attack him.

We want to show that invading Iraq was, in the PRACTICAL sense, very bad for the war on terror. While we should have been using our resources and focusing our attention on Al Qaeda and other terrorists, we invaded a country that did nothing to us.

And as far as impugning his motives, the point that we're trying to get across is that his priorities don't truly lie with the national security of the United States, but instead with the pocketbooks of himself, his father and his buddies, American and Saudi.

It is a moral issue, but not really. It's political.

That's the basic idea.

[Merlin]

37. Right. It's the COMPETENCE, stupid!

This has been one of the most incredibly incompetent administrations in history. Competence is a quality everybody understands and recognizes as essential.

[TexasSissy]

21. I said it before. Kerry's needs to push his Harley and hunting hobbies.

This is macho stuff. Makes him look strong. Guys like that sort of thing. He's more apt to be viewed as "not taking any shit" if he's sitting atop a tough lookin' Harley, holding a hunting rifle.

No shit. That's the truth. I have not seen even ONE photo of Kerry on his cycle or with a hunting rifle. :kick:

[Guaranteed]

26. You're so right.

He's got to be able to pull it off, though.

I think he can. He's tall, and that's about 50% of the way right there.

[Gregorian]

22. Cheney can lose this for Bush

Cheney has some real blood on his hands. I can't remember exactly what. But he was in the Ford administration when very serious stuff happened. Darn it, I listened to a radio show tonight, and they went over the damning things Cheney has been witness to, on his watches, and done nothing about. I suppose many people know this already. If we focus on Cheney's horrors, we can win on that alone, I'm certain.

[ashenshugar]

23. We were lied to

it doesn't matter what his vote says. If he truly believed he was lied to he should hammer that home. People who believe the same thing will swing in his favor

[gollygee]

27. What did * do so great about the war on terror? (m)

he waited how long to go into Afghanistan? And then sent fewer troops than police officers protect Manhattan?

Where is Osama?

I really don't think Bush has done a great job at all on the "war on terror." I just wish the country would wake up to that.

I certainly don't feel safe. My husband travels to Europe on business next week and I'm afraid for him to be on an airplane. I see the pictures of the children in Russia and I see my daughter. I wonder what is to keep it from happening here. It's just a matter of time - if we stay on Bush's course, we will have more and more of that kind of thing and it'll happen right here in this country. It scares me to death.

One of the reasons I'm voting for Kerry is because I want us to be safer. We can't have a president who responds to every incident with his initial knee-jerk reaction. We need someone who has a mature, rational reaction to incidents. Bush's method of operation will make us a bigger and bigger target.

I'm sorry, this isn't really directly in response to your post. I'm just upset about the Russian children who were hurt and killed. It's getting the better of me.

[Guaranteed]

29. Not a whole lot, in reality...

All he did was put in a half-assed invasion of Afghanistan. Everything else was not only ineffective, but detrimental.

[Snellius]

28. Kerry should emphasize he's the only one to resolve the crisis in Iraq

You're right, Kerry can't make up for past mistakes, like voting for the IWR, any more than Bush can. And he made his options even more uncomfortable by saying, knowing what he knows now, he would have done the same thing. But he can exploit Bush's revealing remark that the war on terror is unwinnable and emphasize how he is the only one that can win the war on terrorism. How Bush and his tactics are only making the situation worse. He should be calling for bin Laden's head. He should flat out be calling the Republicans the "American Taliban" in no uncertain terms and saying that Bush is no better than Osama using terror to perpetuate a holy war against some hysterical fear. Bush isn't fighting a war against Al Quaida, or even against terrorism, but against some faceless, timeless EVIL. In other words, Kerry to win has to take on the Bush perverse parody of religion. And I'm not sure he's up to that one.

[Guaranteed]

30. I'm not sure

that would work anyway. I think we have to accept the war on terror premise to win.

We can't win denying the existence of the terrorist threat against our country.

[Snellius]

32. Bush isn't waging a war on terrorism but a war on TERROR

Bush's tactics have been such a miserable failure -- and we should be hearing that apt phrase from our candidates at least once every day -- because his self-righteous crusade has ignored specific and practical solutions, military and diplomatic, to actually winning that war. He thinks because god wills him to do it, the destiny of events will take their course. Bush is a religious nut and Kerry should say so.

[bagnana]

33. How's about

Bush can't keep you safe. Nine words:

"Bin Ladin Determined To Attack Inside The United States."

He heard them. He ignored them.

What else will he ignore??

He is unfit to lead the war on terror.

[Guaranteed]

34. Yup, look at

what bobbyboucher said upthread. That would be a good start.

[EndElectoral]

31. We;ve got to show Bush as the Flip Flopper

1. We've got to his lies and the destruction of our environment
2. We've got to show his lies about nation building exercises
3. We've got to show his lies about WMD's in Iraq.
4. We've got to show his lies about fiscal responsibility
5. We've got to show his lies about underfunding education
6. We've got to show his lies about funding veterans
7. We've got to show his lies about outsourcing.
8. We've gto to show his lies on the disparity between rich and poor
9. We've got to show his lies about protecting our freedoms while gutting the fourth amendment

I think a Kerry ad which says...President Bush calls me a flip flopper. Really? And then show clip after clip of Bush's flip flops.

Then run another one on .... President Bush questions my leadership...Really? Show Vietnam. Show Bush vomiting outside a Senate campaign. Show Kerry on Iran Contra. Show Bush being scolded by his mother. Show the bank investigation, show Bush meeting with Saudis. And lastly show Kerry's speech to the Vets, and show Bush reading My Pet Goat.

I thought that 911 images were off the table, but Bush uses them. It's time to remind people what happened that day. Show Bush in the schoolroom, BUT also show him flying away from trouble while the nation wondered what to do only showing his ass in the evening when the rest of us knew it wasn't WW 3. Show Bush with the Plastic Turkey. Show Helen Thomas sitting in the back of the Press Corps denied the ability to ask a question.

You have got to show contrasts. Simple flags, and I'm a patriot crap is playing into Bush's hands. Turn his accusations onto him. I haven't heard one goddamn word about the environment in this election. Kerry's record is so vastly superior to Bush's. Have a kidding eating fish with mercury, or the record on obesity, or the destruction of our forests, or DC chidlren drinking water with lead. Where the hell are the Greens?

This election should be more than about Vietnam service, and Iraq and terrorism.

Where the hell are the domestic issues?

And if that doesn't work show a Supreme Court image made up of all Scalias......

[Guaranteed]

35. It's not, though.

All it's about is Iraq and terrorism.

That's really it. Any relevent flip-flops have to be extremely obvious and directly related to one of those two subjects. And a lot of Bush's unpopularity already stems from his "flip-flops" (I would call them LIES) on Iraq.

[mzmolly]

38. Here here! Move on had an effective commercial with Richard Clark

that they pulled at his request, I say we ask them to re-air it.

Hell maybe we need a friggen 527 to do what WE KNOW needs to be done.

As you know, I've started obnoxious thread after obnoxious thread all week about this very issue, I've called the campaign, I've written them, I've provided them with links to information they could use to do this.

Pointing out *'s failure on 911 is a start.

Dems always want to *play nice* ~ but this is a friggen cage match, nice don't cut it.

[GOPAgainstGW]

39. NO WAY! - History Shows People Vote From Their Pocketbook NOT War!

This is how Clinton won on domestic issues, and it's the reason Winston Churchhill was voted out of office immediately after World War II in 1945 despite being a World hero for helping us beat the Nazi's and him saving England.

When people don't have money to pay their bills and get the healthcare they need for their Family, they don't care about New York and Washington D.C. terrorism's problems. In fact they are sick of hearing about it based on ALL independent polls.

Kerry-Edward will lose everything including World support if they go down this fascist U.S. rant over the Middle East.

[mzmolly]

41. NOT post 911. Clinton acknowledges that himself.

:hi:

[GOPAgainstGW]

42. Majority of the Public is Against the War-Why Would They Vote for More!!

The American public does not understand the Middle East, and the horrible mistake we made invading Iraq.

Kerry, Edwards, and Joe Biden has to educate the public on this massive mistake, unless this Country wants 100 more 9/11 type events.

Our whole problem is over Middle East policy, not Islamic terrorist.
Terrorism is the result of our policies, NOT vis-versa.

I spent three years consulting Middle East Diplomats in the '80, I know what I am talking about.

NKR


------------------------------
Beltway and Texas Republicans
Against Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc.
------------------------------

[mzmolly]

46. Who the hell said they want more war? War does not = fighting terrorism.

Securing our borders and building national alliances does.

I think you misunderstood the intent of the thread? No one suggests war.

[GOPAgainstGW]

44. Clinton Never Said That - You took it out of Context

Clinton understands the Post-Cold War Middle East Polarization Doctrine. Hell it's Greek to all but a handfull of Americans.

It's not to me however.

[mzmolly]

45. He did say that. He said post 911, he might not have been elected.

Also your assertion that the economy is the priority isnt playing out in recent polls.

Americans will say that, but in reality if they feel their children aren't safe with Kerry at the helm, we will lose the election.

[Guaranteed]

54. I don't think that applies this time around.

There's no real logic anymore. It's just a dick-measuring contest.

[mzmolly]

40. PS, Kerry made an impassioned speech on the floor of the senate

the night of the vote, clarifying his vote was for inspections.

If Kerry can do two things, get out the message that he supported inspections, and ... seperate the WMD thing from the NUKE thing, we will have a start.

Bush said Saddam had Nukes, WMD's are not nukes, and Saddam is not Osama. We need conscise talking points making our case.

I like the "SMOKE AND MIRRORS" theme. We can go a long way with this. George Bush ~ smoke and mirrors. He claims X and the reality is Y. :hi: Smoke and mirrors. He says one thing and does another ~ smoke and mirrors. etc. Pretty soon the public is saying things like "Bush is all smoke and mirrors" it becomes part of their conscience.

TALKING POINTS TALKING POINTS TALKING POINTS Mr. Kerry! Repeat them often.

Kerry needs to hire a good speech writer or two as well.

Were not sticking to a message, were not getting our message out. We need to tailor the message, trim it and repeat it often!

Also is their tape of Kerry's comments when he voted for the war?



http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/kerry-iraq.html

[Guaranteed]

48. I don't think that's going to cut it.

People compare that to Bush's position and it just sounds like after-the-fact justification.

They're just not buying it. They've HEARD it, anyway. It's not working.

[mzmolly]

51. Your probably right. I guess some of us knew he couldn't challenge Bush on

Iraq.

He's between a rock and a hardplace, he says that he was mislead on the one hand, but that makes him look like he has poor judgement on the other? And, then again he can relate to 70% of the population with the I was mislead statement as well. ???

Pundits are saying what we already know, he has to choose between being called a flip/flopper and adding to that image, and/or not challenging Bush on Iraq.

Tough choice ...

I do think he needs to differentiate himself more from Bush on Iraq but it's a tough call.

We can differentiate on National Security, but we better do it soon.

[Guaranteed]

47. Kick nt

[DeepModem Mom]

52. kick

[lil-petunia]

53. On Kerry and biking,

the waffen SS won't let him bike anymore. Not without incredible controls and bullshit. You forget how isolated they can make a person. While Shrub was born like that, Kerry used to be out with real people. He won't be for the next 60 days. So doing the biking thing is not a bad idea, but I don't see it happening. Worse yet, we think of it here, and they don't in Team Kerry.

The real problem is in how Team Kerry responds and creates new issues. "Horribly naive" is one term that comes to mind. Even though dozens of smart people here at DU have be WARNING ABOUT THAT VERY SITUATION for months. Now that there is a shakeup in the leadership of the campaign, the issue is, was it in time? Will those brain dead people who squandered so many opportunities still be given a voice to muck it up worse? Or will some talented old hands finally put this campaign on the right track?

Seriously, name one subject - one - on which Bush is on the defensive BECAUSE of the Kerry campaign. Honestly. Just one.

Can't do it can you? Instead, we have been treading water in a shit storm on stupid crap like Swifties. Why? Because the campaign heads in Team Kerry are untalented, stupid and incapable of running this most critical campaign in US history, that is why.

[roseBudd]

55. He should be on defensive for Aug. 6, 2001 PDB

Please print and distribute the image above. High res version for printing available below. Put them on car windows. Hand them out on street corners. We don't need TV buys to get some attention on this issue. We have to undermine Bush's perceived strength. We all are potential disseminators of printed media. We do not need a newspapers permission or lots of money for TV commercials. We need viral grass roots marketing. We need to create a buzz. If we create a buzz with massive distribution of printed ads we will get media coverage. If these start miraculously appearing and no one knows where they are coming from it will start to get media attention. now someone create a Condi ad and an Ashcroft.

INCOMPETENCE is key

high resolution version for printing here:
http://somnamblst.tripod.com/