It's positively Rovian

I think I heard Bush say today that John Kerry was engaging in the politics of fear. This was when he was talking about Kerry’s position on Social Security (Bush seems to think Kerry is trying to frighten the elderly by criticising Bush’s plan for privatization - at least that’s what I think it was about). It really doesn’t matter what it was about. What struck me about it was the absolute Chutzpa involved in Bush accusing Kerry of the politics of fear when the entire Bush Presidency and his only hope for election is based almost exclusively on exploiting the politics of fear. Dick the Slimy was at it again also, carrying on about the dangers of someone bringing in a dirty bomb in a suitcase or some such thing. But not to worry, the multi-billion dollar missile defense system that doesn’t work, and probably never will work, will protect us from suitcase bombs. And if not, just regard it as money well spent for the defense industry. Have to keep them going, you know.

But what really got me thinking about this is what seems to be a pattern of the Republican campaign strategy. Think about it. John Kerry has a distinguished service record and was awarded medals for valor. Bush was a National Guard drop out, most probably AWOL for much of his time. So what better strategy than to attack Kerry’s war record?

Bush has flip-flopped on virtually every important issue of his Presidency. No 9-11 commission, yes a 9-11 commission, no Rice testimony, yes Rice testimony, no nation building, yes nation building, only one hour with the commission, no limit on time, no Homeland security, yes Homeland security, weapons of mass destruction, no weapons of mass destruction, no drugs from Canada but vaccines from Canada, etc., etc. etc. So what better strategy than to label Kerry a flip-flopper?

Having turned the largest projected budget surplus in history into the largest budget deficit in history why not accuse Kerry of being a tax and spend liberal (rather than a credit card spend and spend lunatic and passing the debt on to our children and grandchildren)?

While wearing $2000 to $3000 dollars suits why not accuse Kerry of wearing $200 shirts and getting expensive haircuts?

Having failed miserably in everything he has attempted, including his Presidency, why not accuse Kerry of not being a leader?

Having virtually no record of accomplishment as either a businessman or a politician why not attack Kerry’s record as a senator?

Bush was born with a silver spoon in his mouth into an exceedingly wealthy family and is himself wealthy. So why not pretend to be a Texas cracker and criticise Kerry for being wealthy? And what is worse, having a wealthy, intelligent, and outspoken wife.

Am I the only one who sees a clear pattern here? A pattern that has Karl Rove written all over it? Rove is a master of turning defeat into victory, black into white, failure into success, down into up, fantasy into truth, hogwash into statesmanship, and more. Let us hope Kerry is right and Bush’s lies are catching up with him. As far as I am concerned they caught up with him a long time ago.