The war bloc

The war bloc

: Glenn Reynolds frets that Bush has a problem with his “war bloc.”

Glenn marks the shift of a supporter such as Andrew Sullivan to the capture of Saddam Hussein.

I’ll ascribe it to other causes. Call them fears.

First, there was the fear of Howard Dean. He was George Bush’s greatest ally. When Dean was the front-runner — hell, the shoe-in — it frightened a lot of us, particularly those of us who believe that the war on terrorism is job 1, those of us in the “war bloc.” When deciding on Dean v. Bush, many of us found ourselves considering surprising options (i.e., voting for Bush). But once Dean started fading, the Bush’s magnetic field faded fast.

Second, there was fear of the religious right. The real Bush is Ashcroftian and though those impulses were tamped down as Bush set about fighting a few wars and doing his job, as the election came nearer, they are re-emerging. Odd that he should feel the need to lean right again since he doesn’t have to fight for the nomination — and now that he has a real liberal running against him — he could have staked the center; but that’s not the real him. So we have the marriage amendment. We are reminded of the stem-cell policy. We see his bioethics panel noodling. We see his FCC threatening to clamp down on content. We see the NRA play Congress like a marionette show. Now when it came time to step into the voting booth, all those fears might well have scared the “war bloc” left about Bush more than about Howard Dean. But with Dean gone, those fears of the religious right rise again like a sauerkraut belch.

Third, his own supporters are frightened by his spending and big-government ways. They won’t drop him, but their grousing doesn’t help is karma.

Yes, I supported Bush on the war(s). I was in that “war bloc.” But most of these fears do haunt me about him. And with Kerry instead of Dean, we do at least have the chance of a more credible wartime leader. Emphasis on “chance.” Kerry still has not learned the electoral lesson of the defeat of Dean — that people do care about this war — and stepped forward to show he can lead the troops and protect the people.

Andrew Sullivan says it well:

He looks like a potential president. But it was deeply worrying in one respect. The war on terror was barely mentioned. This on a day of appalling carnage in Iraq. I fear this man simply doesn’t get it. No one should support him for the highest office in the land until he proves he understands our enemy; and demonstrates that he will get up every day in the Oval Office to see how he can take the fight to the Islamists. I don’t see that fire right now.

Now it’s time for Kerry to see that Bush is his opponent and to prove that he can be a better wartime president than Bush has been.

Sullivan also sums up the state of the race: “So far, with Kerry’s limitations and Bush’s pandering to the far right, it’s neck and neck.”

37 responses to “The war bloc”

  1. Charlie (Colorado) Avatar
    Charlie (Colorado)

    And with Kerry instead of Dean, we do at least have the chance of a more credible wartime leader.

    And besides, Bush might convert to Islam, and then where would we be?

  2. Superfly Avatar
    Superfly

    Your examples on why Bush is ashcroftian do not make sense. Bush never wanted to even discuss gay marriage until a bunch of judges and mayors forced the issue. Unless you know somehow that Bush ordered the FCC to crack down on indency he is not responsible for that either. Again Janet Jackson pushed that issue out into the open. Now all of a sudden Bush is appartly the head of the NRA as well and responsible for it playing congress. Who knew? A real ashcroftian would have brought up the ammendment month ago and would have campaigned on the FCC cracking down, but Bush only reacted when he was forced to. Bush was satisfied with the status quo on all these cultural issues untli outside events forced him and the people working under him to react. An ashcroftian would not have waited for the events before acting.
    I am terribly disappointed in the Democratic party for nominating Kerry. He is a man with no integrity on key issues and no vision on how to lead our country in battle against enemies that want to kill or convert every last one of us. After all that has happened in the past three years, if he becomes president for life and death decisions he will still stick his finger into the wind to find the safest political course no matter the long term costs. That the main reason why I am voting for Bush.

  3. Theodopoulos Pherecydes Avatar
    Theodopoulos Pherecydes

    I don’t care if Bush hands out free prescriptions to everyone, bankrupts the country, fills it with Mexicans and appoints Ashcroft to the Supreme Court. As long as he keeps stacking up dead Islamic radicals or stuffing them into Guantanamo, he’s my man.

  4. Reid Avatar

    Kerry’s entire war protester and legislative career screams out that he would cut and run at from Iraq and the WOT at the first available opportunity. A leopard cannot change his spots.
    Please note, in particular Jeff, the Kerry campaign’s betrayal of the Iranian people mentioned in this article. You can go hunt up the article in the Tehran Times online. Do a search for headlines at or around Feb. 6.

  5. Prim Avatar

    “The real Bush is Ashcroftian. . . We see . . . .[all these horrors.]” Did you see his (and Ashcroft’s) prominent statement after 9/11 (and since often repeated) saying we are at war with terrorism, not Islam. Apparently you didn’t see that he has pushed through the only meaningful domestic legislation in decades affecting education, health care and economic recovery. Did you notice his churlish bad form in calling Kerry to congratulate him?
    Sullivan says, ridiculously, that he is in trouble because of his successes. And such successes they are. So long Taliban, Saddam, Libya’s nukes. The changes in Pakistan, India, Syria, Saudia Arabia, are measurable. The North Koreans are deeply afraid of him, and Iran is as nervous as an old, incontinent dog.
    If Bush is in trouble, it is not because of Ashcroft. It is because the likes of you and Andrew, who profess to understand that the war is priority 1 through 20, are now whining about priorities 99 through 100. If you truly believe that keeping Howard Stern on the air and that cheerleading for lawbreaking mayors have the dignity of winning the war on terror, then your blogs are the ones in trouble.
    Winning any war takes resolve, and this one more so than any other. Bush has it. You and Sullivan don’t.

  6. Sydney Avatar

    I agree with Superfly. Your criticism of Bush doesn’t mesh with reality. Bush was forced on the issue of gay marriage. The stem-cell policy was a pretty good compromise in not using federal funds for new research (private entites like Harvard are already going forward anyway). The FCC hasn’t proposed new rules, and the marketplace is correcting itself on issues of “indecency.” Your hand-wringing about Howard Stern’s ability to speak his mind is laffable – he’ll be there, and will be picked up by other stations.
    Secondly, using Andrew Sullivan as a barometer of shifting support is fundamentally ridiculous. Sullivan has one pet issue and will probably end up voting for Kerry because of it. The majority of the country, while not entirely persuaded on the FMA, is totally against gay marriage and will probably come around to the Amendment if mayors keep breaking state laws in defiance of their oaths. Americans don’t want anarchy. And they don’t want to be smeared as bigots, like Sullivan does, either.

  7. KMK Avatar

    An amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage has a snowballs chance in hell of passing. It first needs the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate and then ratification by 38 states. That is not going to happen. The Massachusetts ruling is sound it will not be overturned. You cannot gender discriminate period. Bush can pander away for votes. As a democrat, who voted independent once, I would vote for a ham sandwich over Kerry. I waffled a bit over Edwards but it only lasted seconds. So I guess I’m in this newly named “war block”. My political views are more in tune with http://michaeltotten.com

  8. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >Bush never wanted to even discuss gay marriage
    This is true, but the reason for it is that he didn’t want to have his homophobic views exposed to the voters this close to the election.

  9. Ebb Tide Avatar
    Ebb Tide

    Here is what Kerry has to say about Foreign Policy, it’s a lot to read, but you’ll know where he stands on the War on Terror.
    Kerry’s 2004 Foreign Policy Speech at UCLA,
    HERE
    Kerry’s 2003 Foreign Policy Speech at Georgetown,
    HERE

  10. Sydney Avatar

    That’s right. Smear anyone who’s opposed to gay marriage as a bigot and a homophobe. That’ll work.

  11. Dean Avatar

    One thing I found bewildering about Sullivan’s comments:
    Given Kerry’s record of flip-flopping, even if he came out in a speech expressing position “X” on the War on Terror, what makes Sullivan believe that he wouldn’t pursue policy “-X” once he was in power?

  12. Reid Avatar

    Good point, Dean, and an effective rebuttal to “Ebb Tide” above.
    Just wanted to point out again the article I cited above which speaks to Kerry’s recent betrayal of the Iranian people. I would expect Jeff, who has shown an intense concern with the Iranian people’s struggle, to have a particular interest in that.

  13. h0mi Avatar

    his homophobic views exposed to the voters this close to the election.
    Because noone knew since 2000 that Bush opposed Gay Rights and Gay marriage, and only now is this an issue?

  14. hen Avatar

    Bush is a homophobe and the NRA helps terrorists buy guns…any other nuggets of genius, bobby?

  15. Peter Avatar

    “Now it’s time for Kerry to see that Bush is his opponent and to prove that he can be a better wartime president than Bush has been.”
    How can Kerry prove this to you? He has had a year as a national candidate to prove his seriousness about the war, and he hasn’t come close. In fact, if there is one thing that he has been clear about, it is his view that this is NOT a war, but rather better handled as police action. In addition, his record in the senate is not one distinguished by hawkishness; he is far more likely to follow the multi-national, UN-dominated approach which he himself advocates.
    So, I guess for me, since the war effort is so central, I can’t imagine voting for anyone other than Bush. Why would I listen to Kerry given what he has said over the past year on the campaign trail already and given his senate record? Anything that would appeal to me would be a complete change from his stated position. And I wonder how you could actually trust him on the war effort, given your support in the past. I could understand if you simply felt that there are other more important issues now, and on those you feel more comfortable with Kerry. But if that is not the case, how could Kerry somehow say the right thing that would overcome EVERYTHING else he has said and done?

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I don’t buy this “Bush’s hand was forced” on the gay marriage thing. Come one. The thing is Dead on Arrival. No chance. Not a snowball’s chance in hell of even getting out of Congress.
    It is *purely* a piece of symbolic red meat for the fundies, and nothing more.

  17. The Lonewacko Blog Avatar

    Cultural conservatism and authoritarianism are not necessarily a “right” thing.
    Bush is a social conservative and a “corporatist.” His attempts to bring in as many serfs as possible so Tyson, Wal*Mart, and agbusiness don’t have to hire Americans or modernize is going to hurt his chances in California at least. Not that he cares.

  18. Sydney Avatar

    Bush wasn’t forced on gay marriage? So you mean to say that Massachusetts did NOT revolutionize the issue, that the “marriages” in San Fran is NOT a red-hot topic of debate, that the concern about the unconstitutionality of the DoMA is NOT an issue, and that Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence stating that the decision paved the way to gay marriage was NOT a warning on the court’s legal reasoning?
    Ok. That settles things.

  19. MattS Avatar

    I don’t care if Bush hands out free prescriptions to everyone, bankrupts the country, fills it with Mexicans and appoints Ashcroft to the Supreme Court. As long as he keeps stacking up dead Islamic radicals or stuffing them into Guantanamo, he’s my man.
    Wow.

  20. Insufficiently Sensitive Avatar
    Insufficiently Sensitive

    Kerry is so experienced at taking any side of an issue that he’ll crank up his flacks to write all sorts of stout ‘war on terror’ claptrap to prove he knows all about it.
    Then if elected, he’ll go sucking up to the EU and fight Islamofascists with handholding circles at the UN. No sale here, Mr. Kerry.

  21. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Given Kerry’s record of flip-flopping,
    What record? (Hopefully this isn’t about the state-amendment vs. federal-amendment thing.)
    even if he came out in a speech expressing position “X” on the War on Terror, what makes Sullivan believe that he wouldn’t pursue policy “-X” once he was in power?
    Better question. Why should anyone believe what Bush says about the war on terror, when his whole position on it appears to be dictated by expediency for the political wing of the White House?
    See, the question of Bush misstepping and losing even his “war base” is a perfectly valid one, and I think, frankly, that this is a sign of his “war bbase” showing an ability to distinguish form from substance on issues less emotional to them — an distinction that Bush and his inner circle clearly aren’t familiar with. Where I part ways with these guys is that I just don’t understand how Bush even has a “war base” at this point, given the alarmingly half-assed and on-the-fly execution of his ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan; even if I were a supporter of either policy, I’d be supremely pissed about now.

  22. rivlax Avatar

    Oh, give it a rest, Jarvis. What does “Ashcroftian” mean? Only in America could a man who served his state of Missouri in a distinguished manner with no blemish on his record be demonized by paranoid liberals who like to believe before they think. You people remind me of Mel Gibson — in “Conspiracy Theory.”

  23. ronbo Avatar

    “The real Bush is Ascroftian”? I don’t know how anyone knows who the “real” Bush is on social issues. There is no political capital to be earned in taking positions on narrow-but-deep wedge issues until the very last minute (if then), and Bush has skillfully avoided such issues until now. And what does “Ashcroftian” mean anyway, other than “evil”?
    On the #*%$*! amendment, I have to conclude, along with many others, that his hand was forced – less by the courts than by SF’s self-adoring mayor, who thinks he is the second coming of Rosa Parks. Fortunately, it has no chance of passage. Unfortunately, it needlessly provides ammo to people looking to slag Bush as a hard-rightist.

  24. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >That’s right. Smear anyone who’s opposed to gay marriage as a bigot and a homophobe.
    Hey, if you oppose inter-racial marriage you’re a racist, plain and simple. If you oppose same sex marriage you’re a bigot and a homophobe, plain and simple.

  25. superfly Avatar
    superfly

    Doctor Slack Wrote: “Given Kerry’s record of flip-flopping, What record? (Hopefully this isn’t about the state-amendment vs. federal-amendment thing.)”
    Lets see: there is on multiple votes for the invasion in Iraq and for regime change to be the official policy of the United States government, and then criticizing Bush for actually invading and not voting to fund the reconstruction effort (while at the same time criticizing te president for not doing enough to win the peace!). And for supporting Clinton to act unilaterally if necessary when dealing with Iraq and then criticizing Bush for not getting France’s approval before invading. Go read his 11/9/97 speach on the senate floor and then compare it to what he said since Bush decided to invade Iraq. If you still think he is a man of integrity and conviction regarding these important issues, then you are beyond help.
    Other examples: Voting for the Patriot act and then criticizing the Patriot act after it passed. Claiming to be for the troops, but voting against letting them have the weapons they need to win. Sending out letters saying he was both for and against the first Gulf War to the same constituents. Being for affirmative action reform, until he got criticized for being for reform. Being against drilling in ANWAR until the teamsters asked him to be for it. Being for the ending of dividend taxes, until he decided to bash Bush for being in favor of ending the tax.
    Kuasfiles has good details and so do a lot of other sites. It saddens me that this is who the democrats want to lead our country in a time of war (or according to kerry, depending on who asks him, this time of police action).

  26. Sydney Avatar

    Mr. McClelland,
    In Nov. 2003, Pew Research did a poll and found that 55 percent of Americans believe that homosexuality is a sin. The New York Times and CBS did a poll in December, 2003 and reported that 61 percent of Americans oppose gay marriage.
    I suppose 61 percent of Americans are bigots.

  27. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    A follow up:
    In May 2003, a Gallup poll showed that 60% of Americans do not believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
    Thus, the majority oppose gay marriage, yet would tolerate homosexuality. They don’t sound bigoted to me. They do sound, however, like they respect traditional values.

  28. superfly Avatar
    superfly

    To Robert McClellan: Thank you letting us know how simple it is. If you oppose incestuous marriage, you are a bigot and a siblingphobe, plain and simple. If you oppose polygamous marriage, you are a bigot and a polyphobe, plain and simple. If you oppose child marriage, you are a bigot and an ageist, plain and simple. If you oppose interspecies marriage, you are a bigot and speciesist, plain and simple.

  29. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    More like: if you think same-sex marriage is a slippery-slope to widespread sex with animals, you are a moron, plain and simple. It’s a sign that you need, perhaps, to spend a little more time asking yourself a about your own man-on-dog obsessions and a little less time trying to project the government into your fellow Americans’ bedrooms.

  30. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    I’ll get to the Kerry stuff later… but Jeebus. You’re getting your info from Kaus? That explains a few things…

  31. superfly Avatar
    superfly

    I was just applying his logic to these other situations. You seem to be a lot better at attacking the messanger then in actually dealing with the message. You attack myself and Kaus without attacking the substance of the argument or the accuracy of the claims. It is much easier to insult someone then actually deal with their arguament. I never mentioned anything about the government going into people’s bedrooms or even proposed a slippery slope arguements (I thought we were discussing the legal requirements of marriage).
    Some people think that you should be allowed to have multiple spouses, but most of our society opposes this. If we use the logic you defend, then it is “plain and simple” bigotry to oppose it and the government should just stay out of their bedrroms.

  32. Dinosaur Avatar
    Dinosaur

    Insta is just beating his chest in order to show he is open minded. He then features a lot of pro Bush emails, and concludes Bush has not lost any votes, and by inference, Kerry is dead meat. Thanks Insta, for your expert analysis. Has he looked at the latest polls?

  33. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >I suppose 61 percent of Americans are bigots.
    Apparently that’s the case.

  34. Andrea Harris Avatar

    “Hey, if you oppose inter-racial marriage you’re a racist, plain and simple. If you oppose same sex marriage you’re a bigot and a homophobe, plain and simple.”
    And if your name is Robert McClelland and you type something, you’re an idiot, plain and simple.
    Yeah, we’re “bigots,” troll-boy. We hate morons.

  35. Dinosaur Avatar
    Dinosaur

    Let’s talk flip-flop’s. Cheney was for states rights to decide gay marriage (lest we forget, the Repubs hold themselves out as the state’s rights party), but now he’s in the Fed Const Amendment camp. He should not flip flop so much, his heart may not be able to take it. where’s the defibrillator?

  36. Jeff Brokaw Avatar

    Sullivan “fears this man (Kerry) doesn’t get it”.
    Wow – can’t get anything past Andrew Sullivan, apparently.

  37. Superfly Avatar
    Superfly

    Dinosaur: Cheney has never said he supports the ammendment. He said he supports the president. I think if the actual states were deciding the issue and not rogue courts and law breaking mayors, then there would be no one calling for an ammendment.