Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Konichiwaneko
Mr. Mephisto, before I start I want to tell you I hold you with the utmost respect and though we don't agree with political views I am honor of your contributions, mostly of the nude variety, to the tfp. I ask you these question not to stir you up only to get a reply.
|
You won't stir me up at all! I enjoy debate and learn from others all the time. Your questions below are very interesting ones and they made me think quite a bit before replying. That's what this is all about!
Quote:
|
I notice you put these qualities for President Lincoln, I would like to see how you compare these traits to your political beliefs.
|
Sure thing.
Quote:
Lets start with this one
- [i]He alone (until US Grant) understood the gravity of the Civil War and what it would take to win it.[/u]
I believe General Grants strategy during the war was call "The grinder". Essentially it was pretty much throwing our men, not caring for casualties, to oppress the opponent. I'm sure back then it would be the same as now, people were appalled...yet the strategy worked in the end all history shows us that now. My question to you, would you accept President Bush if he was vindicated at the end, that his strategy that people saw was a huge mess turned out right?
|
Well, let's answer the last question first. Would I accept Bush if his strategy turned out right in the end? Yes. Yes I would. That is, insofar as it's up to me.
There are som differences though. First and foremost, the Union, the whole United States, is not fighting a Civil War now. It is not in the utmost danger of collapsing. And Bush is not throwing men and women into combat in the same way as Grant did.
Grant and Lincoln "did the numbers". They knew the Confederacy couldn't keep up with the casualties that the North could. But that was a sign of the times. No one, no President could do that today. Times have changed. People's beliefs in what is worth dying for has changed. And a lot of Americans don't believe that it's worth dying to ensure the Vice-President's cronies get some juicy oil contracts in Iraq (joke... kinda).
So in summary, if Bush were "proved right" would I accept him? Of course. But I honestly don't think he will be proved right in his war in Iraq, his environmental policy, his social policy. That's the problem with a lot these things. They're very subjective. The Civil War was pretty "cut and dry". Either the North won and preserved the Union, or the South won and destroyed the Union. I don't believe there's such an easy logic to the Iraqi conflict.
Quote:
- He was a politician who accepted he did not represent all Americans, but reached out to try to "save the Union."
Lincoln saw the United states as a great whole, not as a disfunctional society. Do you think Senator Kerry's constant berating of our government and it's disfunctional state going to backfire on him? What if he does aquire the president posistion, and in his 4 or 8 years can't fix what he considers broken. Do you think our people would subconciouslly feel that we are a broken society and nothing can fix us?
|
Well, whilst Lincoln tried to reach out and understood,
especially before the Civil War broke out that it was incumbent upon him to govern by the law and for those who also did not support him, he was never afraid of lambasting or criticising the "opposition". And don't forget that Bush does the same! So, to be honest, I'm not sure if using Kerry's political criticism of the right is appropriate as a foil in this case. Bush attacks and criticises the left just as much (if not more).
Will Kerry's berating back-fire on him? Well, I don't think so. No more than Bush's berating has back-fired on him. There will always be people who argue for either side.
What if he doesn't "fix" things? I don't think any one man can fix the things broken in any society. Especially Kerry if the Congress has a Republican majority!
Will people continue to think the US is dysfunctional? Well, I don't think it is. It obviously is functional as a society. There are things that are not working right. Kerry and Bush both agree on that. But they both have different political agendas and political beliefs. My preference are for those promulgated by Kerry, but that doesn't mean I don't understand, or that I disrespect those of Bush and his supporters.
Quote:
- He was a great leader during the countries most dangerous time.
President Bush is far from being a great leader, I think both left and right can agree on that. Yet earlier you listed General Grant as an example, and history told us that he was terrible at his job as both general and president yet he got the job done. Do you think that President Bush can once again be vindicated because of this over time?
|
Well, I don't know if you could say Grant was terrible at his job as a general. Certainly as a President, but I'm not sure as a general.
Do I think Bush will be vindicated over time? Well, that depends upon the end result. I personally don't believe his strategy (if you will) is the best way to address the threats and challenges that America faces. Who know (though) what history will tell us. In a hundred and forty years from now, maybe Bush
will be considered a great President. I don't argue that possibility. My gut feeling is that he won't be, but I've been wrong in the past.
Let me tell you one of the main reasons I don't think Bush will be considered a great President. Simply because of the polarization of US politics. I honestly believe he doesn't really care that much for those that disagree with him. The opposite can be said for Lincoln, who very
much cared what the opposition felt and tried to always walk a middle ground (before civil war made this impossible).
Finally, if you are asking if Bush will ever be considered as great, or in the same league, as Lincoln, then no. I don't think so. Ever.
Let me add that I think the "right", the conservatives, the Republicans have produced many great politicans and Presidents. Lincoln himself for example. Even Reagan could be considered a great President (even though I don't support Reaganomics and some of his rush towards militarization), but he's certainly head and shoulders above Bush in stature, intelligence, charm and capabilitiy. Colin Powell would have made a great President. Cain would have made a great President.
But Bush? My honest opinion is no.
So I guess "my beef" (if you will) is not with conservatism as a whole, but with Bush in particular. I honestly don't think he's that great.
Quote:
|
I know you will give a good answer Mr. Mephisto.
|
Not sure if this is up to your expectations! LOL
Mr Mephisto