on the defensive

So I guess Karl Rove, the so-called political genius, has come right out and stated that Bush's re-election campaign is a defensive one. According to This article the Bush camp "has material ready to go on Kerry based on his votes and speeches" which is really pretty sad. No, not pretty sad. Really, really, pathetically depressing. An incumbant president does not run an attack campaign, it's just not right. In fact, not attacking has a name: the "Rose Garden Strategy". But his break from that norm is an admission that the first term was more or less a failure and that there's really nothing to stand up and defend. Attack the other guy.

It's especially pathetic when the candidate doing it has always tried to depict himself as an honorable man, someone that has unquestionable character, someone who is anything like Clinton. Clinton, however, did not attack Bob Dole by name until July of 1996, Bushy's daddy didn't mention Bill Clinton's name in an attack until August of 1992, and Ronald Reagan didn't attack Wlater Mondale by name until October of 1984. Each of these other men had balls to stand up and defend their record, make themselves out to be truly presidential, have honor. Dubya has no such honor.

It just makes the whole system -- government, politics, the whole shebang -- just that much more weak and fucked up. Not only do we have a president that is eroding civil liberties and destroying our fragile foriegn alliances around the globe, but he is ripping to shreads what little dignity is left in the office of the President of the United States after what certain other presidents have done (and yes, I am including Clinton in that too in case any rabid Republican attack dog thugs google this blog or something). For shame, for shame.

God Bless King George!