Where Kerry Stands on Iraq
I feel like I'm getting lazy, but I'm going to do it again. I'm devoting most of this blog entry to other people's writing. First, John Kerry came out with his best speech yet. The full text of that speech is available here: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0920.html.
I'm a big proponent of listening to what the candidates have to say in their own words. I believe, as Kerry says in the opening of his speech, that elections are about choices. And one of the easiest ways to learn about what our choices are is to listen to what the candidates have to say about themselves and each other. (I have also long held that the worst ways of informing ourselves about our choices are following polls and coverage of election strategy. Those are nothing but examples of lazy journalism and a waste of time. Never respond to election polls.) So read Kerry's speech. It hits on most of the big points Kerry's been skipping up to now. Bush as pathological liar. Bush as inept war president. How Kerry is different.
Now, we know we can't trust politicians to tell us the truth about themselves or each other. Not the whole truth anyway. That is where the media comes in. We need the media to call the candidates on their statements. That is the beauty of freedom of speech. Crackpots like Zell Miller can rant away about how Kerry voted against pretty much every weapons system our military uses, but we can count on the media to expose those misrepresentations for the garbage they are. So after reading Kerry's speech on Iraq, we are correct to question whether Kerry has told us the whole truth. Is that really what he means? Well, William Saletan, Slate's chief political correspondent, has written an excellent piece parsing Kerry's speech. Click on the title of this entry to read the Slate story. Saleltan does a great job distilling Kerry's long-winded and obtuse style into simple statements, and does an equally great job pointing out where Kerry hasn't been specific enough.
I just love it when election coverage rises to the occasion.
I'm a big proponent of listening to what the candidates have to say in their own words. I believe, as Kerry says in the opening of his speech, that elections are about choices. And one of the easiest ways to learn about what our choices are is to listen to what the candidates have to say about themselves and each other. (I have also long held that the worst ways of informing ourselves about our choices are following polls and coverage of election strategy. Those are nothing but examples of lazy journalism and a waste of time. Never respond to election polls.) So read Kerry's speech. It hits on most of the big points Kerry's been skipping up to now. Bush as pathological liar. Bush as inept war president. How Kerry is different.
Now, we know we can't trust politicians to tell us the truth about themselves or each other. Not the whole truth anyway. That is where the media comes in. We need the media to call the candidates on their statements. That is the beauty of freedom of speech. Crackpots like Zell Miller can rant away about how Kerry voted against pretty much every weapons system our military uses, but we can count on the media to expose those misrepresentations for the garbage they are. So after reading Kerry's speech on Iraq, we are correct to question whether Kerry has told us the whole truth. Is that really what he means? Well, William Saletan, Slate's chief political correspondent, has written an excellent piece parsing Kerry's speech. Click on the title of this entry to read the Slate story. Saleltan does a great job distilling Kerry's long-winded and obtuse style into simple statements, and does an equally great job pointing out where Kerry hasn't been specific enough.
I just love it when election coverage rises to the occasion.
posted by Charles S. Russell at 3:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home