No campaign rhetoric
Reader comment on item: 9/10 vs. 9/12 on 11/2

Submitted by M.N. (United States), Oct 31, 2004 at 04:43

A plea: make your column a place where readers can reliably find intellectually honest discussion.

What I find so frustrating about this election is that candidates, pundits and activists alike seem more interested in winning dinner-table debate points than in analyzing policies, seeking truths and arguing for solutions. So we repeatedly hear the same over-simplified talking points, hollow promises, half-truths and decontextualized quotes. Surely you consider yourself a more credible source of ideas...

I'm currently a Kerry supporter, but I do believe there are compelling reasons to reelect President Bush. (His claim that 9/11 changed him is not one of them--his change of heart should have occurred months earlier, when he was warned about terrorism.)

My difficulty, in these last few days of mulling it over, is that I don't know where to find those opposing arguments discussed in good faith...

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.