Bush and 9/11

Some Democrats have apparently been advising Kerry not to focus on national security, but to focus on domestic issues. Kerry doesn't SEEM to be taking the advice (thank God), but he's not going far enough with it.

"Focussing on domestic issues" would be stupid. It's a loser in the current climate. While Bush is talking about protecting people from possible nuclear anihillation, you can't stand there countering by talking about the price of prescription drugs. One just isn't nearly as important as the other. If there is a major terrorist strike, nobody CARES about the price of prescription drugs. The war in Iraq and fighting Al Qaeda ARE the most important issues, by far, and a candidate who ignores those two issues will lose (and the Democrat has to make it clear that they are two different issues, not one, as Bush would have it).

Kerry should hit Bush right in the 9/11.

Karl Rove's strategy is to attack an opponent's perceived strength instead of his weakness, and it's a good idea. Kerry should do the same. Bush wants to brag about his reaction to 9/11? Fine. Hammer, hammer, hammer the facts: Bush ignored the threat of terrorism BEFORE 9/11, he ignored the August 6th, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing ("Bin Laden determine to strike inside United States"), he presided over the biggest intelligence failure in American History, he sat like a deer in the headlights when the attack occurred, and he swore on a pile of bodies that he was going to get Bin Laden when he was already planning to go after Saddam Hussein instead.

George W. Bush's reaction to 9/11 is nothing he should be bragging about, and he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. He THINKS it's a strength. It's not, and shining a white light on it will turn it INTO a weakness.

Kerry should knock him right off that pedestal. And it should be like shooting fish in a barrel.