Conservative Anger Grows Over Bush's Foreign Policy-Kerryism?

[babylonsister]

The fact that these warmongers are associating themselves w/Kerry pisses me off!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801373.html


<snip>

Kenneth Adelman, a Reagan administration arms-control official who is close to Vice President Cheney, said he believes foreign policy innovation for White House ended with Bush's second inaugural address, a call to spread democracy throughout the world.

"What they are doing on North Korea or Iran is what Kerry would do, what a normal middle-of-the-road president would do," he said. "This administration prided itself on molding history, not just reacting to events. Its a normal foreign policy right now. It's the triumph of Kerryism."

</snip>

[Island Blue]

1. Perhaps * should have tried "Kerryism"

BEFORE he totally and completely fucked up in Iraq, thus weakening our hand when dealing with all other nations.

Although I will say that I personally think that I think *'s new foreign policy is brilliant. "They should tell Syria to stop doing this shit." Brilliant! I'm sure that would have been John Kerry's exact policy. :crazy:

[whometense]

2. This is just the latest lipstick-on-a-pig right wing

thinking.

They're trying to call Bush a liberal because everyone hates him.

It's beyond stupid, and only the most blindered, willfully ignorant divortced from reality diehards will buy into it.

[karynnj]

3. Note that it also infers that Kerry is "normal middle of the road"

on Iran and Korea. (We think he's better than that, but that is far better than saying he is a left wink lunatic or worse - which they have.) The fact is that Korea and Iran are far worse than they were in 2000. Those 4 years, of Bush being Bush have taken their toll. Now, we just need Bush to adopt the Kerry Iraq plan (or even the compromise Kerry/Feingold plan).

This is really a convoluted version of Bush and his administation taking actions Kerry backed years ago - when they with a more intelligent (and taller) president would have led to a saner world.

[Mass]

4. Actually, there is among the neocons an attack on diplomacy.

It has been started with Iraq, of course, followed by Iran, North Korea, and now the ME.

Newt Gingritch is the more vocal of these people, but many (and that would include McCain) are advocating force rather than diplomacy. Ironically, for all her defaults, Rice has been trying to act as if she wanted diplomacy and it is this school that is loudly attacked by the Gingritch's clan in their attacks against diplomacy.

This should remind us once again that the ennemy of our ennemy is not necessarily our ally, though you begin to see some people happy because Gingritch is attacking Bush (cant they see that Gingritch and co want Bush to be more violent, not less).

[karynnj]

5. Exactly, the right that is criticising Bush is actually worse than he is

in terms of policy. They are also smarter and have the ability to sound more reasonable (in the case of McCain and even Gingrich.)

[ProSense]

6. The coward crowd is attacking the Crook in Chief

Conservatives now see timidity in Bush on foreign affairs
By Michael Abramowitz
The Washington Post
Published July 20, 2006


WASHINGTON -- At a moment when his conservative coalition already is under strain over domestic policy, President Bush is facing a new and swiftly building backlash from the right over his handling of foreign affairs.

Conservative intellectuals and commentators who once lauded Bush for what they saw as a willingness to aggressively confront threats and advance U.S. interests said in interviews that they perceive timidity and confusion about longstanding problems, including Iran and North Korea, as well as urgent new ones like the latest crisis between Israel and Hezbollah.

Snip...

Kenneth Adelman, a former Reagan administration arms control official who is close to Vice President Dick Cheney, said he believes foreign policy innovation for the White House ended with Bush's second inaugural address and his call to spread democracy throughout the world.

"What they are doing on North Korea or Iran is what Kerry would do, what a normal middle-of-the-road president would do," he said. "This administration prided itself on molding history, not just reacting to events. It's a normal foreign policy right now."

more...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0607200211jul20,1,4804770.story?track=rss

Bush is Kerry?


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Mass]

7. Kerry should use this column to reaffirm that he stands by the use of

diplomacy and that this is not what Bush does.