'Global Test'
CNN just did an article discussing what we addressed in class in regard to the ‘Global test’. In the article, http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/04/kerry.global/index.html, Kerry spends some time making his circuitous way to the issue, then finally clarifies his position. “America is stronger when we are leading global alliances and when we are leading the world, and that's how we are going to do it. And that's what I meant.” This makes the ‘test’ out to be a method of strengthening our position. In his speech, however, he said the global test was where “your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons." This makes it seem more like the U.S. has to prove itself to the world. I believe Kerry truly meant the former, but I can understand why he’s being attacked for simply for his poor phrasing at the debate.
Condoleezza Rice criticized Kerry for the remark (not terribly surprising), http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/03/rice.bush.kerry/index.html, and she also supported statements the President made during the debate. I found this rather amusing, as it was an admission in itself that Bush’s credibility was in doubt. I suppose you could argue that it always has been in this election because Kerry has made it so, but for some reason her defense seemed weak to me, both in content and in purpose. She said Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan had been brought to just, while CNN points out that Khan has been pardoned and none of his conspirators have been brought to trial. She also defended Bush’s claim that there were 100,000 trained Iraqi security forces, a number
Condoleezza Rice criticized Kerry for the remark (not terribly surprising), http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/03/rice.bush.kerry/index.html, and she also supported statements the President made during the debate. I found this rather amusing, as it was an admission in itself that Bush’s credibility was in doubt. I suppose you could argue that it always has been in this election because Kerry has made it so, but for some reason her defense seemed weak to me, both in content and in purpose. She said Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan had been brought to just, while CNN points out that Khan has been pardoned and none of his conspirators have been brought to trial. She also defended Bush’s claim that there were 100,000 trained Iraqi security forces, a number