We, as Americans, cannot forget that fateful day in September, 2001, when destruction seemed to rain from the sky in the form of hijacked airliners. Nor can we forget the lessons we so painfully learned that day.
Sept. 11, 2001, was an intensely personal day for many Americans. Many within the Georgetown community were deeply affected by the tragic events of that morning. There is no doubt that as the third anniversary approaches and as the presidential election draws near, Sept. 11 will become a hotly debated topic.
Many people accuse President Bush of trying to “politicize” a national tragedy. Indeed one fellow Hoya went so far as to say, “Politicizing the Sept. 11 attacks is a distraction from the substantive issues that should be defining this election” (“New York Convention Exploits National Tragedy,” THE HOYA, Sept. 3, 2004, A2).
Far from being a distraction, Sept. 11 and the prevailing lessons of that tragedy should be cornerstones of the campaigns. Certainly nothing since Pearl Harbor has had a more profound effect on our foreign policy. The war against terror that President Bush is so resolutely prosecuting will be the defining issue of our generation. Come November, Americans will have to decide whether or not to stay the course.
Sept. 11 is a defining issue of the Bush presidency. On that day, more than ever, his leadership became evident, his purpose, clear, and his resolve, unquestioned. But more importantly, Sept. 11 tragically elucidates many of the differences between the candidates.
President Bush has pledged to see the war on terror through, regardless of the wavering opinions of others. He has had a clear stance on the war on terror since the very beginning and has vowed to pursue terrorists and their resources wherever they may be. He has been willing to do whatever necessary to ensure homeland security (despite the apparent disapproval of France). In these uncertain times, it is both comforting and refreshing to have a strong leader in the Oval Office.
Senator Kerry, on the other hand, has failed to provide a coherent foreign policy or a concrete plan to go after terrorists. He voted for the war in Iraq, and then spoke out against it. He voted to fund our troops, then changed his mind and decided it better not to fund them. And when his position on Iraq got too messy, he decided that it was more relevant to talk about Vietnam, a war that ended 30 years ago.
It appears that the Democrats think Sept. 11 and the war on terror are distractions from “substantive” issues, yet apparently find a four-month period from 30 years ago to be essential. We gladly and appreciatively acknowledge Kerry’s bravery in Vietnam, and we simply wish he would show that same courage in the political arena.
It seems as though anytime the Bush campaign raises questions about Kerry’s votes in the Senate or his stances on certain issues, they are attacking him. Anytime the questions get too hard or happen upon an issue Kerry would rather not discuss (was he for the $87 billion or against it?), he cries foul. Now it would appear that rather than enter a “substantive” debate about the war on terror and the ramifications of Sept. 11 on U.S. foreign policy, the Democrats would rather cry foul.
We encourage an open and honest debate about the issues both here on campus and in the larger community. President Bush has laid and carried out a clear plan for America and now it is time for Senator Kerry to respond with something more than negative politics.
President Bush is not politicizing the tragedy of Sept. 11. He is pointing out clear differences between his vision for America and the policies and mixed messages of John Kerry.
Tom Armstrong and Erin O’Connor are sophomores in the College and are co-chairs of Georgetown Students for Bush.
