"I'd feel much safer with Kerry in the White House."

[Armstead]

I believe that for at least 40-45 percent of the country, that is a true fact beyond debate.

So why is the Bush campaign and the Media Whores getting away with this stupid mantra that "Americans feel safer with Bush in charge" and why are so many in thge public buying it?

For millions of people, the prospect of Bush holding the guns for another four years scares the bejeezus of us. Who knows what he'll do without the constraints of an election? How many other nations will he set his sights on for war? How many otehr allies and neutrals will he alienate the US from? How much more can he stir up the world?

And, for God's sake, if there is another provocation like 9-11, I'd sure want someone with a cool head in charge. Who knows what kind of a temper tantrum will Bush throw?

Kerry has so far been a lousy candidate. But he's got the qualities to be a strong and smart leader. I'd much rather trust him in a crisis. In saner times, it would be no contest. But these aren't sane times.

How can the huge block of people who fear four more years get it across to the reasonably sane fence straddlers (or Bush supporters with doubts) that Bush is not the strong, steady leader we need in a tense world?

It's a rhetorical question, but somehow we have to find a way to amplify our collective voices to fight back against this foolish meme that Bush will keep us safe.

We have to make it clear that almost half the population DOES NOT feel that Bush has "an edge" in the war on terrorism. How?

[dennis4868]

1. How can people feel safer with Bush in charge.....

if he was the prez who fucked up and was responsible for protecting and we had the worst disaster on 911 in this country's history....911 happened under Bush's watch for crying out loud and people feel safer with him in the WH? WTF!

[Droopy]

5. It's the wars

Many people don't hold Bush responsible for the attacks of 9/11 and they see the wars as the result of a strong leader striking back at our enemies.

I see the wars as a nightmare, but some people admire brutality apparently.

[dennis4868]

7. do people admire.....

a prez who pulls out of Aghanistan when we had OBL cornered and takes all the intelligence and special forces out to go fight a worthless war in Iraq for a lie?

What war are we fighting to defeat terrorism? NONE....the people are being miseld by Bush and his lapdogs in the media....

[Droopy]

9. Correctamundo

That's the message Kerry needs to get out there.

[dennis4868]

10. plus....they dont hold Bush.....

responsible for 911 because the media hides the information that would clearly show that he is responsible...but the fact is people should be able to put 2 and 2 together and figure out Bush fucked up and because of that we had 911....it is even obvious reading the 911 report which is very careful not to put blame on anyone.

[SoCalDemocrat]

2. we do need to fight back

We are definitely NOT safer with Bush in power.

If another 9-11 occurred, he would probably invade France.

[Armstead]

14. Hell, he'd probably invade Hollywood

or one of them other hotbeds of unAmerican weenies

[cheshire]

3. What are you basing your statement on? I see things different.

[Armstead]

8. I'm going by the fact that this has been a very tight race, plus.....

Most everyone I know feels the same way. Fear of Bush is as much of an anxiety-producer as fear of terrorism for them. Worse, actually,m because they are afraid that he will make the problem worse, and they are worried about what he would do if there were more attacks.

I live in a blue state, so I realize that's skewed. But the people I know who feel this way include many who are moderates or conservatives rather than staunch liberals or Democrats.

But the message that "the war on terror" is Bush's strongest issue keeps gettinbg pounded into people's heads. Somehow it has to get out that those who feel the opposite are not a small minority.

[library_max]

4. First of all, where are you getting your numbers?

The incumbent has an automatic advantage regarding gut-level issues like safety. He has been President for four years and the country hasn't been invaded, etc. etc. Kerry can't say that. The mere repetition of "President Bush" makes Bush sound more presidential than Kerry, to the kind of people who react most strongly to safety issues (i.e. fearmongering). Also, the right wing media has been pumping up Bush's image of strength every which way.

The more the voters get to know Kerry, the more they'll be reassured that he is also a "safe" choice.

[Armstead]

12. The relentless repetition is driving the numbers

My observation is not a scientific sampling. But just looking and listening makes it obvious that a significant number of people are worried about Bush. Whether or not it's an absolute majority, it's enough to make it patently obvious that the WOT is a political liability for a substantial segment of the population.

[Mr_Spock]

6. I'm WAY more afraid of Bush than any band of two-bit thugs.

Bush is destroying everything that makes us great - just ask Jefferson:

When people fear their government, you have tyranny.

When government fears it's citizens, you have freedom.

We have tyranny, and it ain't due to the stupid fake "War on Terra". I'm friggin' more likely to get hit by lightning than killed by a terrorist. Hard to believe we live in a nation of easily duped cowards, but we do. So, so sad. Thanks for the "hateriotism" Mr. person pretending to be President.

[napi21]

11. I can't say that I feel unsafe right now! But terra is not my main

concern. I think the US will be a target of Muslum fundimentalists as long as it looks like we are trying to take over their territory. I know it is part of Shrub's plan, and so do they. I believe kerry stands a much better chance to get us out of there, with assistance from other countries, because he isn't the one who's pi**ed off the whole world!

My biggest concern with shrub is his secrecy, wanting to stack the court system with extremists, and consistently trying to promote the upper income people at the expense of the middle class.

To me, that's a much bigger concern than some petential act of terror!

[Armstead]

13. That too. It's all of a piece

Who knows how much the screws will be tightened at home, in the name of "national security" regardless of what happens with the WOT?

But since most people have not bothred to look into those things, the basic issue of "safety" is the court we're stuck on. That's where Kerry has to project strength and wisdom somehow.

[Poiuyt]

15. In fact, Bush has been very weak on homeland security

I've started to do some research on the topic that Bush and the Republican Congress have been weak on homeland security and soft on terrorism. I'm not done compiling my list, but here is a web site detailing many items where Bush has failed in his leadership to make this country safer against terrorism:

http://americanpundit.blog-city.com/read/537356.htm

Spread the word. Let's attack Bush at his (perceived) strongest asset.

[Armstead]

16. Exactly. They've screwed the pooch on all levels

I sure wish the media would note the irony of the White House simultaneously touting how much "safer" we are because of Bush, while at the same time scaring everyone with continual terra alerts.

[kid a]

17. The MEDIA feels safer with * in WH nt

[Seabiscuit]

18. Bush is the worst nightmare

for national security in the history of this country.

Feel safe now?

[kentuck]

19. We will never be safe as long as George Bush is in the White House.

At least, that is my opinion. He should have prevented attack on 9/11.