When Reagan ran for reelection, running on a Reganomics platform, he asked us whether we were better off than we were four years ago. Now Bush is running on a homeland security platform, but he does not have the courage to ask us if we feel safer than we did on September 12, 2001, to say nothing of four years ago. He knows the answer.
Since then, Bush has: squandered our military in a war that has nothing to do with homeland security and has left Iraq a more dangerous place than before; set a dangerous preemptive precedent that gives license to shady regimes throughout the world; angered our allies so we have to fight the so-called "war on terror" alone; angered our enemies, breeding terrorists faster than we can capture them; and left Bin Laden at large.
A Kerry presidency, on the other hand, would recognize that fighting terror is a complicated problem that requires a balance between military strength and diplomacy; that compromises between allies can pay off in the long term; and that our national safety requires that we become a better world citizen.
How did Bush get to be the Homeland Security candidate?