My Point Exactly

I've been insisting for eons now that the Democrats should strive to own the national security argument.

Contrary to popular opinion -- you know, the GOP is the party of "strong" defense -- national security will be a winner for the Democrats. It will be a winner primarily because the Republicans (or at least one Republican in particular) have proven to be so inept on the issue. George Bush has demonstrated a complete lack of foresight, creativity, and diplomatic sophistication regarding national security in general and terrorism specifically. His administration has a complete misunderstanding of the threat and he is woefully incapable of mounting an effective response to a threat he does not comprehend.

His binary rhetoric may sound good to the bubbas with the Pabst Blue Ribbon and the turkey pot pie. But "bring it on -- you're either with us or agin us" don't mean jack to Muqtada on the Iraqi street. Given enough time, Muqtada and his IED will have a greater effect on Bubba's thinking than Dubya's latest "we've got em on the run" canard.

And time may have just run out. Kevin Drum has found a graphic that clearly demonstrates the growing recognition that Bush is simply out of his element when it comes to national security and the threat of terrorism.

It is not enough, as I've noted before, for Kerry to sit around and wait for the public to become disenchanted with Bush's mishandling of America's security. It is not even enough for Democrats to fan the flames of the wreckage of Bush's policies. Democrats must establish a legitimate, coherent alternative to Bush's strategic and tactical failures. Thankfully, Kerry has begun to do just that. Establishing a framework for international cooperation complete with power sharing and actual respect for our allies is a strong start (which Bush finally, reluctantly, embraced). Fully funding first responders and infrastructure security initiatives will go a long way toward actually improving national defense as opposed to merely appearing to improve our safety. And, perhaps most importantly, Kerry brings to the table a certain gravitas and ability to think deepely and deliberately about the cause and effect of America's actions.

Perhaps these are some of the reasons why Kerry is now outscores Bush on the question of who is more qualified to handle terrorism.