Politics is a Dirty Game

Yes, Throughout history politics has had a reputation for being deceitful, evasive, and destructive. Incidents such as the Watergate Scandal, multiple assassinations, character scandals, and unfulfilled promises have created cynicism towards politics. Even today I find myself watching the 2004 presidential and vice presidential debates and questioning each candidate's motive and character.

To be honest, before now I have been interested in politics for several reasons. First of all, I have never been old enough to vote so I never felt it was necessary for me to pay attention. Second, the very few times I have watched or listened to candidates in the past they have have followed the typical campaign trend of aggressively attacking the other candidates views and defacing their opponent's ideas rather than emphasizing how their own ideas will make America a better place.

However, now that I will be voting in my first presidential election I have begun to follow each campaign and have been very interested in the debates. I am neither Democratic nor Republican because I feel that assigning myself to a party only would create a sense of loyalty which in turn could potentially impair my judgment when I vote. Therefore, I am officially registered as Independent.
During the September 30 presidential debate the candidates focused mainly on the War in Iraq. President George W. Bush began by discussing the current conditions in Iraq, potential difficulties, and their hopes for the future. Senator John Kerry then went on the offensive, declaring that President Bush had wrongly begun this war and did not have a plan for bringing our troops home or for setting up a successful democratic Iraqi government. Kerry continued by claiming that Bush wrongly began this war without the support of the United Nations on Saddam Hussein, a man who had no clear connection to Osama Bin Laden, AL Quida and the September 11 Terrorist attack. He also claimed that Bush began the war telling the American people that Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq which was a threat to America when in fact there were no weapons found. All the while Kerry accused Bush of being to sure of himself and not being truthful with the American people.

Bush seemed to spend the entire debate defending his decisions. He explained that they did have support from other nations and they were fighting terror. He explained that the troops have fought bravely and the Iraqi people have come a long way. He explains that in order to keep our country safe we must be strong in our resolve to fight terror and show the world we are not afraid. He continuously attacked Kerry inconsistency about the war, explaining that American troops and American people would not want their president to think of Iraq as "the wrong war at the wrong time."

Here, I would like to interject my feelings about the War on Terror. After September 11, 2001, America became unified in its resolve to bring justice to those terrorists. For a long time political, social, religious, and economic ideas and status were forgotten while people from around the world came together to help us in our time of need. I felt this was an incredible time for the America and the world because for a time, hatred and anger was set aside so they we could help those who had lost so much. However, when Bush first declared war on Iraq, I found myself wondering "Why Iraq? What happened to Afghanistan and Bin Ladin?" Today I still find myself wondering how the actual connection was made. I still don't agree with the many facets about the war though I am thankful that a madman like Hussein could be brought to justice so my family will not have to fear him in the future. However, misguided I believe that this war has done some good to the world and I am thankful to the men and women who are willing to give their lives for our safety and freedom.

However interesting and "entertaining" as these debates may be both candidates were very interested in attacking character and political views. I was impressed by Kerry's debate style and his aggressive style, although I later became frustrated because I felt I could not get a strong idea about Bush's campaign ideas because he had to spend so much time defending himself. I believe Bush was strong in his resolve not to give in to Kerry's character or political attacks although I did agree with Kerry that too much confidence can blind a person to the facts.

Over the past two years I have not been a supporter of Bush and believed many of his actions to be hasty and misguided. However, I am not at all convinced that Kerry would do a better job. He is an impressive debater and speaks for the people's interests; however, many past presidents have had unfulfilled promises. At the moment Kerry has been able to tell his audience exactly what they wanted to hear which has probably caused his inconsistent nature. He talks the talk but can he walk the walk? America does not need a weak president at this point and Bush has proven his strength as a leader, but can Kerry have the same resolve?

I am still uncertain of who is the better candidate but I believe further debates and information will help me decide before November 2, 2004. I am hoping that future debates will included topics of domestic affairs including healthcare costs, educational issues, problems in the employment market, poverty in America, taxes, same-sex marriages, abortion, etc. I look forward to understanding more about each candidates view on all of the above.