John Kerry would get my vote if, instead of complaining about George Bush rushing to war, he complained about Bush not rushing fast enough.
It was infuriating how long it took before we attacked Afghanistan after September 11. It's infuriating now because there's reason to think bin Laden and friends escaped during that time to Pakistan. And while we waited to attack Iraq, Hussein had plenty of time to pack up and ship the evidence of his WMD program. This resulted in more than an embarrassment for Bush; it increased the danger that those weapons will be used against us, because we lost track of them (assuming they existed).
Because George Bush did "seek a permission slip to defend the American people", by waiting for the approval of the UN, he gave two enemies an advantage they didn't need to have.
So why do I advocate voting for Bush? Because we know Kerry values popular opinion even more than Bush does. At least Bush's words, if not his actions, state the need to act unilaterally. And we know he did, eventually, have the gonads to take action.
The problem is that we're in the dark about what Bush will do next. If Bush had identified militant Islamists as the enemy, then we'd have a better feeling that he's heading in the right direction. The problem is that not only has he not named the enemy (though he has named an "axis of evil"), he chose one of the more secular countries in the Middle East to attack. I was in favor of the Iraq war, because I was in favor of attacking some Middle Eastern country with a connection to terrorism and which positions us to intimidate the other scumbags in the region.
So, the best we can do is to say that what Bush did appears to be a step in the right direction. I've discovered that when it comes to Republicans, and politicians in general, the best you can expect is "a step in the right direction". Unfortunately, there's the risk that the steps are in the right direction, but the shoelaces are tied together.
It's 100% clear to me that my vote for Bush the first time around was the best choice given the competition. I am also pretty sure that a vote for Bush this time will be the better choice. What is annoying is that it's hard to be certain that Bush will continue to push forward militarily. Based on his recent rhetoric, however, and the fact that he won't have to worry about reelection anymore, I do think it's probable that Bush will be even stronger after his reelection.
The other risk of electing Bush is that his religious-conservative tendencies may also be stronger in the next four years. This means the possibility of more censorship, less abortion rights, and less separation of church and state. This will indeed suck proverbial ass. But I blame John Kerry for this dilemma. If that bastard had a backbone and was able to convince us that he would defend US interests based on the principal of self-defense, rather than the principal of the "global test", he would get my vote.
What's most annoying about this election is that I feel like I'm floating in a lifeboat in the middle of the ocean holding a glass of my own urine. It's like I need to convince myself that a glass of urine isn't all that bad when you compare it to the alternative. Sure, urine will keep me alive. But as I paddle my lifeboat through the wake of a Carnival cruise ship, I can't help but think: those bastards must have a bottle of something that can quench my thirst and doesn't taste as much like piss.
Shit, I'll even drink Orangina if I have to.
