They attack Kerry for wanting terrorism to be "a nuisance."

[question everything]

From http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-10-campaign-rndp_x.htm and many others

Meanwhile, Bush's campaign put out a TV ad blasting Kerry for telling the New York Times Magazine in an interview published Sunday, "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance." He spoke of illegal gambling and prostitution as similar problems that don't threaten lives every day.

Didn't Bush say the same thing just a few weeks ago, that we will never completely win the war on terrorism? He probably does not even remember saying this.

[babylonsister]

1. I wish Kerry hadn't said this. Why go there at this point?

Why give furious george more ammo to attack with?

[PretzelWarrior]

3. because it's true. in truth, most all yearn for "back then" and

Kerry is appealing to that feeling people have of being held hostage and wanting to be freed from this years-long torture at the hands of Bush and his "terra alert" minions.

But more than that, it shows there are responsible leaders who know we CAN rip the foundations and support of terrorists right out from under them so they dry up and are only a brief and rare flare-up in our modern world.

We can make it happen. Kerry can make it happen. At people's very root, they are all reaching for and wanting the same things. The president must lead this nation and thereby lead this world to a better path.

[wurzel]

6. Is intelligent political dialog now impossible?

Kerry has simply stated the obvious. The Right Wing is making normal life as impossible as it can. The idea is to frighten us into unthinking obedience to the next order. "Terrorism" has always been around and will never go away. Even in our country terrorism didn't start with 911. It was the most spectacular with a colossal loss of life. Beyond even the terrorists' wildest dreams. For Bush to say "we must defeat terrorism" is the single most stupid statement he has made. How?? In fact isn't it always the mantra of this administration that we should carry on with our lives even under an orange alert? What is that advice? We should regard it as a "nuisance", but not a "focus"?

[LittleClarkie]

7. Because it is a hopeful message

If the war on terror can be conducted in a way that makes us all feel safer, then it would be a hopeful sign. In contrast, Bush would rather we were on a high state of alert all the time, afraid most of the time, paranoid and easily manipulated.

Let's face it, at some point we ought to be able to really get back to just living our lives. Living the way we are now is only playing into the terrorists hands.

I find hope in Kerry's message, and I don't think it was wrong.

[question everything]

9. But Bush said the same thing just several weeks ago!

Didn't he say that we will never be able to win the war on terror?

So how can he turn and attack Kerry - well he can - but our side is saying nothing?

[tuvor]

2. bush is upset at that only because

no one fears a nuisance.

[IIgnoreNobody]

4. Bush doesn't want to beat the terrorists, he wants endless war.

[Jade Fox]

5. Terrorism was around a long time before 9/11.....

and we in the US mostly ignored it.

While we obviously shouldn't continue to ignor it, it is dumb to blow the threat
it presents out of porportion and act like everything else needs to take a back
seat to fighting terrorism.

[seabeyond]

8. we want you the people to be fearful every waking moment

until the day you die, forever and ever..............

and this is what bush suggest in replacement to kerry's statement

[progdonkey]

10. so the Republicans want terrorism?

They want it to be an oppressive and debilitating force upon our democracy?

[Steelangel]

11. Uhhh, read this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1040153