Mixed messages

Piggs pointed this out in the comments, but it's worth taking a gander at:

Rising Hegemon has the debate in pictures. I know that I am particularly fond of image 8. Then there's this perspective from the O'Reilly pages.

Of course, if the war were a programming project, it'd never have gotten management approval in the first place. What are our requirements? What are our milestones? How are we doing? How do we know when the project is over? What's the timeframe for completion? What's the success metric? Is the iRaq project really the best way to beef up the company's security?

But if you're the president or share his insane vision of the world, it's "mixed messages" that are the problem. He must have accused Kerry of that a dozen times. (What is it with him and alliteration?) By the way, take a look at the Faces of Frustration video from the DNC. A minute of the real faces of Bush, who has lived in a bubble so long that an actual opposing view leaves him dumbfounded.

Bush, like many in the GOP, accuses people of things he does himself. What kind of a mixed message is it to say you support the troops and then cut their health care and their pay? It's a mixed message to say you will leave no child behind and then not fund the program. It's a mixed message to say that you will participate in the Kyoto treaty while you're campaiging, and then withdraw from it the minute you're appointed to office. And it's a mixed message to say you will capture Osama dead or alive and then not mention him again for three years.

Kerry crushed in the debates last night. And this was, in theory, the President's strongest suit--international affairs. All I know is that I'd rather have a president who can pronounce "nuclear" correctly and string words together into a thing we like to call sentences than a petulant man-child who's out of touch, out of control, and will soon be out of a job.