[lbo-talk] Why Democrats Can't Blame Bush for 9/11

Chuck0 chuck at mutualaid.org
Mon Apr 12 14:42:46 PDT 2004


Nathan Newman wrote:


> Why does this make Americans idiots?
>
> The public is ready to be pissed at anyone who exploits 911 for political
> purposes. Bush got major flack for using images of 911 in his initial
> campaign ads. I think most Americans (rightly) understand that it was a
> combination of factors that led to the 911 attacks and that stopping
> individual acts of terrorism is very hard. So blaming Bush for allowing 911
> to happen is a loser politically.
>
> But subtlely raising the issue indirectly does help focus attention on where
> opponents can attack Bush, as the article indicates, namely on his failures
> AFTER 911. Bush's fixation on Iraq and his incompetency in pursuing a war
> that has alienated the world is a reason many people are turning against
> Bush.
>
> So I think the American people have this one right. Don't play blame games
> for 911 itself-- have a real debate about what we should have done and need
> to do now to protect Americans from terrorism in the future.

I think Nathan is a bit more on the mark here than Dennis. Blaming Bush might piss off some people, mostly Dittoheads, but there are lots of people who have questions about 9-11 and even more who are upset about the war. You can see this anger out here in the Midwest, at least in the letters to the editor sections.

On a side note, there have been a flurry of letters about Rachel Corrie in the Kansas City Star. The really strange thing about the Star's editorial pages is that they are the most balanced politically than I have seen in any American newspaper.

Chuck0



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list