THERE are currently ten, count them, ten Democrats poised to take over the presidency in 2004 from the evil George W. Bush. (Please note: in the time before this page has gone to press it is entirely possible that the number will have expanded to 15 or 20, as these candidates seem to multiply on a daily basis.) Personally, I am quite pleased that these fine gentlemen have taken so much time out of their busy schedules to point out the horrors that our current president has inflicted upon our great country.
In actuality it is quite sad to listen to the broken record of garbage that these candidates spew at the news media and the public. Usually they will start with how bad the economy is, stating that Bush has destroyed the economy so carefully built under the watchful eye of Clinton. These candidates normally will neglect to mention the fact that our economy is cyclical by nature, and that the rise of the late 90s was only naturally offset by a slight fall. Naturally, the fact that the economy reached the bottom end of the actually very light recession in late 2001 and has been steadily climbing ever since is omitted from the fiery speeches given by the plethora of candidates running at this early stage of the electoral process. Then again, it appears that these candidates aren't too interested in facts, instead choosing to focus on how much "harm" Bush has done to the economy.
After whatever candidate is having his or her own little special rally has finished announcing that the ever-growing economy is, "real bad," they invariably turn to the subject of Iraq.
President Bush has received the short end of the stick since the very beginning on the topic of Iraq. Beginning with unfounded claims of a war for oil and "unjustified" war on a terrorism supporting state, and more recently with vicious attacks on the credibility of evidence used to rationalize the war, few people have been jumping to President Bush's defense.
The gang of ten democratic candidates is split across the spectrum on if war was a good idea in the first place, but all agree that the President has wronged us all in some way. Such fallacies could not be further from the truth. Without delving into the details of the horrors of the Hussein regime, one can say without a doubt that the world is better off with Iraqis living under the provisional government set up by the United States that it was with the oppressive hand of the dictator.
Bush is criticized for asking $87 billion to rebuild Iraq, but no doubt these same candidates would be criticizing Bush if he were to ask for less, claiming that he has not done enough. One has to remember that there is no approach that Bush could take with Iraq that would satisfy the candidates at this time.They have nothing to gain by agreeing with the President; they only benefit by criticizing him.
Some of these candidates at this point are so desperate for attention that they have resorted to bringing up the election of 2000 in which Bush soundly and legally defeated Gore. Of course that tag line does not bring much attention with it, so these candidates have continued to accuse Bush of "stealing the election." None of them really feel the need to explain just how Bush accomplished this thievery considering almost every possible recountincluding the greatest "dimpled chad" leniency pointed to Bush as the clear victor. Naturally no one is terribly interested in referencing the truth as that doesn't win elections for these desperate candidates.
The important thing to remember when listening to the ever growing pool of Democratic candidates is that they really aren't interested in taking a stand against the issues or politics of our current president, but instead choose to focus on bashing the President himself. Bush could be the greatest leader in the history of our country and it would absolutely not matter to these candidates; the attacks would continue. Being of the same party, the candidates measure themselves not against each other but instead by how much they each criticize the President. There is a flawed conception among the Democrats that whoever is the loudest critic of Bush will "win."
The anti-Bush media hype created by this pre-primary campaign is just a symptom of the Democratic Party thrashing wildly about like a fish out of water. Unless the Democrats can attract more attention to themselves, they have no hope of a victory in 2004, and they know it.
(Daniel Bagley's column appears Mondays in the Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at dbagley@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Celebrate the Contemplative Commons and other non-academic student spaces
By Editorial Board | 2 hours agoThe Contemplative Commons stands as a testament to the value of spaces that transcend commercial imperatives, fostering interdisciplinary engagement and experiential learning.
KURTZWEIL: What we lose in the name of efficiency
By Paul Kurtzweil | YesterdayPenicillin was discovered in a moldy petri dish — this government would have it thrown out because it was wasting space on the counter.
RASHID: U.Va. must empower faculty and students through transparency
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | YesterdayBy attempting to contain, or even eliminate uncomfortable narratives, the administration incrementally consolidates power and frays communal trust.
