Sunday, July 25, 2004

Congressman James Greenwood - Press Release

A couple of more things have come to mind recently about this election season.

Since the the speculation of his departure from Congress have come to mind. What if I was wrong about his motivations and timing? What if this really could not be interpreted to be a commentary on his part? Then I read his statement

In the fourth paragraph
"But in my work in health care and particularly with regard to the issues of stem cell research and somatic cell nuclear transfer, I have come to comprehend the enormity of the transformation in human health that is possible with the advancement of cellular therapy"

This is counter to the Bush administration position.

That's one thing.
----------------------

The next thing is the notion of what kind of response at the initial onset of a crisis should a President have? It is fair to measure a candidate's character and integrity as well as their background. We assume that this kind of information will tell us something about how a candidate might respond. In an age of the ICBM and the suit case bomber, is not relevant to ask of candidates how they might respond?

As a voter, if you are going to judge a candidate "strong on defense", is the strength of character to start a nuclear war? Is it not a strength of a defense to know about the sucker punch? Is not rapid-response part of the Rumsfeld style Defense Department? Well, how can the Armed forces respond if a President is unwilling to pull the trigger? President Bush sat for 7 seven minutes before reacting. He gave the Terrorist additional 7 minute head start.

I keep flashing on "Back to the Future" and how the weaker, but smarter, character always won. Are we positioned, as the only super power, to be vunerable to sucker punches? Are we one day going to overswing and miss landing a punch? Al Qaeda is not going to sit still for us to drop a nuke on them.

Clearly the Bush administration that is against "reading newspapers" and stem cell research, is not solititous of new ideas. That the initiative to Mars was only political smoke is further proof that while the Bush Administration is capable of winning a war involving tanks and territory, it will not win a war of ideas.

The war against Terrorism can only be won by starving them of our vulnerabilities without starving ourselves of what makes us American. That takes time, thoughtfull insight and ideas.


No comments: