Ross Mackenzie: In Iraq and Here – The Next Two Months Could Determine the Next President

The Richmond [VA] Times-Dispatch ^ | April 29, 2004 | Ross Mackenzie

[quidnunc]

At the two-month marker of heightened anguish over Iraq and (oddly less so) the war against terror generally, what better time for pulling off to stretch the legs and appraise the situation?

Highlights and who-shot-john:

Fallujah and Najaf. Ayatollah Sistani and Islamofascist thug Muqtada al-Sadr with his "Mahdi Army" of goons. The targeting of American troops and the kidnapping of foreigners; IEDs, firefights, riots, charred American bodies. Madrid and the Zapatero tergiversation. Terrorists in Europe calling for jihad and the rule of Islam; swift rejection of the great Osama's attempted manipulation of European antiwar sentiment, wherein he offered a "truce" with European governments withdrawing their troops from Muslim countries.

The 9/11 Commission and its smearing of the honesty of President Bush, the loyalty of his Secretary of State, and the competence of his National Security Adviser. (The commission features ideologized partisans heavily responsible for 30 years of pressure and legislation woefully weakening the effectiveness of our intelligence agencies.) The Sharon plan regarding Gaza, and heavy thinkers groaning low about how Bush administration support for it has combined with dubious administration performance elsewhere to reduce American esteem in the Arab world to the lowest point in years. Halliburton, etc. The Woodward book. Say-anything John Kerry and his campaign surrogate Teddy Kennedy trashing George Bush and blaming him for everything.

What was right, what was in-between, what was wrong?

-snip-

[Ramius]

It won't be this stuff. This stuff will all be old news by November.

The election will be decided by events that have yet to happen, one way or the other.

[Ramius]

I'm not so sure I would agree, this time. Normally, you're right, but this time I think the decision will be all about national security and the war on terrorists.

At least, it should be.

[counterpunch]

[hobson]

The media have a vested interest in a close race. I read an article that described how the New York Times is hoping a close race will increase subscriptions/profits.