None of the above

It what could be seen as a response to the charge of intellectual timidity, Instapundit Glenn Reynolds peers into the future and sees conflicting, but plausible, scenarios facing a victorious Kerry team – in the process he presents a valid argument as to why he isn’t echoing Andrew Sullivan’s act of contrition for past sins.

  • James

    Well, at least the guy lives here.

    Characterizing a Kerry presidency with totems of the past may more easily present the argument to the readers of the Guardian who can’t see past the Simpsons but it is ultimately misleading. He’s not going to be like Bush, Carter of Johnson, although my life would be a damned sight simpler if he morphed into Nixon or Clinton.

    Kerry has few options. He cannot withdraw form Iraq or Afghanistan. He cannot treat the Palestinians and Israelis in an evenhanded manner and win Florida. North Korea just increased it’s stocks of Plutonium four fold. China will be contesting the Pacific, possibly even have a Moon shot, by the end of his first term.

    We are broke and cannot spend money. The leading edge of the baby-boomers are going to start to stretch Social Security during his watch. If he wins, 49% of all Americans do not want him in office and maybe 30% hate him with a burning passion. He might have both houses of Congress against him so impeachment is again possible. Worse yet, Hillary Clinton will want him dead.

    And we are in the midst of a cold civil war that has been brewing since the Seventies.

    Would you want to step into that?

  • Davros

    It’s being cheerful that keeps you going James 😉

  • David Vance

    No – it’s being loopy. What “civil war” are we in the middle of, exactly? I must have missed that.

    Glenn is always interesting but I think we need to remember that the French candidate, Monsieur Kerry, has NO chance of winning thus he will not be facing any of the scenarios posited.

  • James

    Davros:

    That was the sugar coated version.

    Clueless:

    “What “civil war” are we in the middle of, exactly? I must have missed that.”

    The one bright spot is that you can never be part of it, thank God.

  • ulsterman

    Kerry does not stand a chance in the election. The latest opinion poll has him 6 percent behind.Again as in Ulster, the Vatican has been defeated.

    God Save The Queen.

  • James

    Kerry has a bevy of bishops foursquare against him.

    Please tell me this shower didn’t write to Ohio.

  • David Vance

    James,

    Your lack of manners in addressing my question speaks volumes about your inability to respond in a logical or concise manner. I will assume you don’t respond because you can’t – hardly surprising.

  • Cahal

    D Vance
    James is obviously making a reference to the ‘cold war’ of polarized politics in the U.S.
    The situation is getting unbelievably partisan.
    There is widespread talk of a massive campaign of civil disobedience should Bush ‘win’ another term after losing the popular vote, again.

    I guess James means-
    You can never be a part of it because you don’t live in the U.S.
    Oh well, chin up old boy.

  • David Vance

    Cahal,

    Thank you for your helpful interpretation. It was the “civil war” element in his diatribe that I was quizzing but hysteria is quite common amongst leftist so I will put it down to that.

    I do agree with you that the situation in the States is indeed becoming more polarised and that is sad. A Nation divided is not a great cri de coeur and I hope that after Bush returns, Democrats will learn from Zill Miller and adopt a more balanced less self-loathing approach.

  • David Vance

    Oops..that’s Zell Miller, of course! I recommend his book “A National Party no more” for Democrats who want to find a way back into civilised and logical debate.

  • willowfield

    David

    There’s little logical about Republican arguments. This election is a battle between fundamentalist conviction and reason.