NYT, p.1: Bush's Campaign Emphasizes Role of Leader in War

Bush's Campaign Emphasizes Role of Leader in War

By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: March 17, 2004


A year after ordering the invasion of Iraq, President Bush is moving the war to the forefront of his re-election effort with a weeklong barrage of speeches, an orchestrated set of interviews with senior Pentagon officials and a new television advertisement questioning Senator John Kerry's support of the troops....

***

The White House had long planned to use this week to focus attention on the war, terrorism and national security. The White House is counting on those issues to build support for the president at a time when the other big subject of the campaign, the lack of jobs being created by the economy, is working against Mr. Bush....

***


"The American people have etched in their minds the president's leadership in a time of crisis," said Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director. "That's something voters find comfort in going into an election. Whether it has to be emphasized or not, we've made clear that one of the most important issues is how the two candidates would conduct the war on terror and protect America. There's a clear choice."

By asserting that the war in Iraq is an integral part of the battle against terrorism — an assertion that many critics dispute — the White House has to some extent bet Mr. Bush's political standing as the nation's post-Sept. 11 leader on the effort to stabilize Iraq....


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/17/politics/campaign/17CAMP.html

Responding to 9/11 by getting us into a family revenge war with oil on the side...

Good pickle you got us in MR President-the choice is clear follow Commander AWOL and Dick "the deferment" Chaney or vote democrat for a thinking foreign policy-yes the choice is clear

tsk tsk tsk.

they CREATED the war, increase in terrorism against the US & the world, and the increased threat to our national security. fiction all. what a crying shame, america.

"And we got sum terrers and thems that we don't got, well, they wern't lucky and stuff...snicker..."

"911 should be an example of my leadership style, I fled, er led when those lousy pilots hit those buildings. The choice is obvious."

"We went into Iraq because polls showed that no one knew where Iraq was...se we invaded it to make sure it was really there and not because of WMD."

"My opponent says I'm weak on stuff like jobs, jobs...I got one thank you very much!"

You get the idear.

As has been stated here before, the war is the ONLY thing the chimp has to run on. Had he not invaded Iraq, he would have NOTHING. Sure the war has galvanized the left (and much of the middle and some of the right) against him, but at the same time it is only the war that keeps much of the remainder in his camp. I cannot imagine any way he is going to be elected on such a narrow platform covered with lies, manure, and blood.

I agree with your post.

But even the wars in Afhganistan and Iraq are unraveling; he can't even do that right.

Catching OBL might help Bush temporarily but it probably would not
do much to stem terrorists attacks and may in fact increase terrorism.