Bush: 'I Want to Be the Peace President'

[Subversive Pessimist]

By Adam Entous
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (Reuters) - After launching two wars, President Bush said on Tuesday he wanted to be a "peace president" and took swipes at his Democratic rivals for being lawyers and weak on defense.

With polls showing public support for the war in Iraq in decline, the Republican president cast himself as a reluctant warrior as he campaigned in the battleground state of Iowa against Democrat John Kerry and his running mate, former trial lawyer John Edwards. Bush lost the state in 2000 by only a few thousand votes.

"The enemy declared war on us," he told a re-election rally. "Nobody wants to be the war president. I want to be the peace president."

Bush has called himself a "war president" in leading the United States in a battle against terrorism brought about by the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America.

"I'm a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign policy matters with war on my mind," he said in February.

Despite a surge in attacks in Iraq and U.S. warnings that al Qaeda is plotting another major strike, Bush said U.S.-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had already made America safer, and that his re-election would let him finish the job.

"For a while we were marching to war. Now we're marching to peace. ... America is a safer place. Four more years and America will be safe and the world will be more peaceful," Bush said.

Bush was joined by his twin daughters, Jenna and Barbara, and campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel said the twins would pair up for campaign appearances away from their father starting Tuesday night in Missouri, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Stanzel said the events will be closed to the press.

Bush and Kerry are fighting hard in Iowa, which Bush lost to Democrat Al Gore in 2000 by just 4,144 votes, or roughly two votes per precinct. Recent polls give Kerry a narrow lead, but a Kerry aide said the Iowa race and the one in Missouri remain a dead heat.

Later on Tuesday, Bush was to attend a re-election rally in Missouri, a state he won by 3 percentage points in 2000. Underscoring its importance to Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney campaigned there on Monday.

Bush and Cheney have sought to cast Kerry and Edwards as on the side of trial lawyers, who the president believes are responsible for a flood of personal injury litigation that burdens the courts and is costly to small business. Democrats get campaign contributions from trial lawyers, while many businesses tend to favor the Republicans.


"I'm not a lawyer, you'll be happy to hear," Bush said to cheers. "That's the other team. This is the pro-small business team."
He also lashed out at them for not backing an $87 billion funding for the U.S. military presence in Iraq and the country's reconstruction. The two Democrats have said they opposed the funding in opposition to Bush's Iraq policy.

Bush campaign officials say they were increasingly upbeat about their chances in Missouri after Kerry reduced his ad spending there ahead of the Democratic presidential convention.

But the Kerry campaign said they were not ceding any ground, only conserving resources for later and pouring ad money into other hotly contested states.

"Missouri is a very competitive state and we're going to fight for every vote," said Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer.

The two-state swing was part of a weeklong offensive by Bush before the Democratic National Convention in Boston starting July 26. (Additional reporting by Caren Bohan)


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=5722238 (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5722238)

[Rex_20XD6]

"I Want to Be the Peace President"

Well, if you wanted to be the "Peace President" why did you go more in-depth with Iraq then in Afghanistan? (Remember the WMD’s that went there?) Bin Laden was in Afghanistan remember?

[praxis1966]

I was just watching this show on PBS last night in which the issue of language in the presidential campaign was discussed. They had a political strategist there who talked about this very issue. He said that the primary difference between Democrats and Republicans is the way that they debate.

Republicans, on the one hand, have a much easier time framing things in order to manipulate public perception (the phrase "death tax" immeadiately came to mind). In one of the examples that was given, the interviewer played a segment from a Bush campaign speech in which he discussed his "Healthy Forrest Bill." Right away the phrase implies conservationism (ie who in their right mind would oppose healthy forrests??), as opposed to the clearcutting that it actually allows. Also, in the speech Bush used the phrase "common sense" repeatedly in relationship to the bill. In other words, don't listen to the experts (conservationists and ecologists), and use your common sense. Nevermind that most people don't know thing one about the science of ecosystems, or anything else for that matter.

Democrats, on the other hand, seem to have this antiquated Enlightenment Era mentallity that if you present the facts to people, they will come to the appropriate conclusion. This thinking is completely false and the reason why they seem paralyzed when it comes to getting any of their agenda addressed in Washington. It renders them completely incapable of mobilizing any popular support within the American public.

He went on to talk about The War on Terror, which this analyst and I tend to agree is the largest vagary of our time. I mean, how can you declare war on terror anyhow? Terror, simply defined, is fear. Fear can be caused by anything, including tall buildings and spiders. Is Bush planning on dropping MOABs on every spider in the world too? What leftists ought to do when debating with cappies and other right wingers is reclaim the framework of the language. Steal the terminology of the argument back and you've already won.

[Kurai Tsuki]

They idea of Bush being a peace president is so laughable that it doesen't even need to be debunked like it were a serious statement.

[Guerrilla22]

Intersting coming from the same man that procclaimed himself "the war president". not all that long ago. A better name for him would be "the fuck-up president".

[Kurai Tsuki]

American interventionism isn't a mistake that's confined to a particular president, it's a fairly consistant government policy. The difference between the current administration and some of those of the past is that it's more willing to intervene directly rather than funding coups.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by Kurai [email protected] 24 2004, 06:32 PM
They idea of Bush being a peace president is so laughable that it doesen't even need to be debunked like it were a serious statement.
Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but the point is that the Republicans seem to be better politicians. That is to say that they are more skillful when it comes to manipulating public perception. The rhetoric they use oftentimes appeals to a larger body of the public than does that of the left.

It is no secret that instead of hiring the usual Washington spin types to handle the press, the Whitehouse hired Madison Avenue advertising people to appeal to the people. Ari Fliescher (an Uncle Tom if I've ever seen one) and his ilk have consistantly used psychology to effect sympathy for the neo-con cause via phraseology more effectively than any other administration in recent memory.

I would agree that the idea of Bush proclaiming himself the "peace president" is the grandest farce I've been privy to in the political sphere since Ross Perot said "I'm not crazy," but the fact of the matter is that we of the left need to take a serious look at how to countermand this sort of thing. It seems as though the American public, in their indefatigueable naivety, believes everything that comes out of the man's mouth as though it were the word of god (oddly reminding me of how the average Egyptian viewed the pharoh oh so many centuries ago).

The question is, then, not whether Bush is undeniably and irrevocably full of shit, but what we should do about it and how?

[refuse_resist]

The Republicans and Democrats are in no way for peace. Both have been involved in just as much interventionism.

Comrade Praxis is right about how they tend to debate differently, yet the same. If you've watched any of the presidential debates, you can just see it. This can also be said about the 2000 presidential debates between Bush and Gore.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Wow. :-| Bush is stupid.

[Abajo con el imperialismo]

http://www.jibjab.com/ this is so funny:P

[Mr. Krinklebein]

Originally posted by Kurai [email protected] 25 2004, 12:32 AM
They idea of Bush being a peace president is so laughable that it doesen't even need to be debunked like it were a serious statement.
Exactly!

Similarly, I'd take this as another opportunity to ridicule the poor (not materially, obviously) guy if he didn't already mock himself so well. Let us revel in the divine hilarity of this pacifist prophet:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39350000/jpg/_39350125_bush_ap.jpg

Boy, that math he's doin' in his here head must be gettin' pretty fuzzy, ya think?

[refuse_resist]

Boy, that math he's doin' in his here head must be gettin' pretty fuzzy, ya think?

He just doesn't get it. :P

[CubanFox]

Peace president? What a fucking riot!

I can't think of anyone who deserves the appellation less than Dubya!

[Intifada]

"War is peace"

[Fidelbrand]

what a crock of shit....
his stupid war on "terrorism" is proved unsucessful , both theoretically and practically.
And now he wants to be the good and peaceful guy after his brainless Texas raging~ BAHA! A bad political joke~!

[Revolt!]

its quite obviously a reaction to sell himself as for Peace after so many people were against the War. Its a mere propaganda tool for the elections, as always with Politics.

Someone mentioned him calling himself the 'war president' at one point. The full quote is
I'm a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign-policy matters with war on my mind. Again, I wish it wasn't true, but it is true. And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is. And I see dangers that exist, and it's important for us to deal with them.

Its quoted on Moore's farenheit 9/11 but only up to 'war on my mind' so it could be misinterpreted. I'm reminded of what Chomsky says on the matter of inventing enemies.

[Pawn Power]

Bush: 'I Want to Be the Peace President'
Sounds like something that would be in a Saterday Night Live skit.


"the fuck-up president".
thats it!

[Rasta Sapian]

well if Iraq has been liberated (attacked) , than maybe he can bring peace (war)

Politics are so wonderfull :)

vote democrats, they are not perfect but they are a hell of alot better than that lier in office now!