Soul Man

Imperial President - Opposing Bush becomes unpatriotic. By William Saletan

Watching the convention speeches of Zell Miller and Dick Cheney last night, I discovered a few things. First, in the run up to Miller's speech, watching the delegates clap and dance along to the song "Soul Man," I realized this important truth: Republicans have no rhythm. Within the view of a single camera, you could watch as five different sets of (white) hands clapped along to five apparently different songs. It was a spectacle to behold.

[Update: I've just learned thing 1.5! Zell Miller challenged MSNBC host Chris Matthews to a duel last night after his speech! The Republicans must be glowing with pride over this PR coup!]

Second, I realized, somewhere in the middle of Cheney's bombast about 9/11, that the Republicans have no message this year. They're not talking about the last four years in any meaningful or honest way, and they're not talking about the next four years, though tonight's speech by Bush is alleged to contain some sort of "vision." They're talking, instead, about John Kerry. They're grudgingly granting him the fact that he fought in Vietnam, then claiming that everything he's done since makes him unpatriotic, indecisive, and unfit for command, as the book title would tell you. Because they can't allow the American people to view this election as an opportunity to hold Bush accountable for what has transpired under his leadership, they've done everything they can to make the election about his challenger instead.

In my mind the response to this is simple. If Bush wants this election to be about fitness for office, Kerry's answer should be "Bring it on." Let's face it: At this point, a President Kerry is going to be bloodied and beaten by the time he reaches the Oval Office. The Republican playbook from now to November promises to deliver a daily bruising. It's time to hit back. What makes Bush fit for office? Is it his stellar attention to detail in the run-up to 9/11? His laser-sharp focus on the people who caused 9/11 in its aftermath? The American people are no longer fans of the war in Iraq; Kerry should point out, on a daily basis, until its sinks into the ever-thickening collective American skull, that going to Iraq diverted resources and attention from the real war on terror and made America less safe in the short and long term. He should hammer away at the constantly shifting rationale for the Bush tax cuts--first, to give back the "people's money," then to buffer the economy against a recession, later to propel the economy back to health. And he should point out that all the while, in providing the great mass of the American people with a couple of meaningless rebate checks and giving the rest to folks who quite simply don't need it, Bush has mortgaged the American future. He should make plain that a government, like a family, must make choices. He should point out that Bush's choices will have deleterious consequences for not only today's American workers but for their children, who will be paying the interest on the debt Bush's tax cut binge has created long after the beneficiaries of those cuts have spent every penny and returned to the earth.

None of this is ugly, but as William Saletan points out today, the Republicans will call it ugly. They'll call it unpatriotic. And when they do, Kerry should hit back just as Saletan does today.

In a democracy, the commander in chief works for you. You hire him when you elect him. You watch him do the job. If he makes good decisions and serves your interests, you rehire him. If he doesn't, you fire him by voting for his opponent in the next election.

Not every country works this way. In some countries, the commander in chief builds a propaganda apparatus that equates him with the military and the nation. If you object that he's making bad decisions and disserving the national interest, you're accused of weakening the nation, undermining its security, sabotaging the commander in chief, and serving a foreign power—the very charges Miller leveled tonight against Bush's critics.

Kerry should call Bush's campaign tactics un-American. Or his surrogates should do so--loudly, continuously, and without shame. Because that's exactly what they are. To run a campaign that will determine the future of the most powerful nation on earth in a way that upends the very foundations of democracy is as un-American an activity as I can imagine. I don't think I'm alone in believing this. Kerry just needs to show the American people what Bush is trying to do. I have faith that once they understand, Americans will reject these tactics for the patently unpatriotic rot they are.