On the Saying "Terrorists Will Put Bush in Office"

• August 23, 2004
• James Skemp
• article, political

The reason most people foresee George W. Bush taking the presidency in the 2004 election is because most people believe Bush has the best chance protecting America from terrorists, compared with John Kerry.  The question is, what does this mean?

Put bluntly, this means that despite Bush’s record from 2000 to the present, fear will put Bush in the Oval Office for another 4 years – fear brought on by an arbitrary colour system – fear of a people on the other side of the world, attacking us because we believe in freedom, or so they say.

It’s amazing that one incident in 2001, and no real incident since then, could have such an effect upon most people.  Yet, when fears are piled upon fears, it’s really not so amazing.

What is a terrorist?  Let us say that a terrorist is one who uses terror against an individual, or a group of individuals, in order to get them to act a certain way.  Terrorists perform ‘acts of terror’, including threats of harm if certain things do not go their way.

Is threatening an individual, or individuals, with harm an act of a terrorist?  One would claim that it is.  Looking at it like this, a bully is a kind of terrorist.  Bullies keep people in fear – often the bully believes that they are right, or that they deserve the power that they hold.  A kidnapper is a kind of terrorist, both to the kidnapped, as well as to the relations of the kidnapped.

An unjust government – one that, according to democratic ideals, gains control not by the people, but by way of an elite group of individuals – is a kind of terrorist, perhaps best called a terrorist organization.

Now many questions arise.  Who put Bush in office – the people, or the electoral college?  The people, in total, put Gore in office, not Bush.  It was in fact the electoral college that put Bush in office.  But, put this aside.

Does the United States government ever use terror tactics – does it ever threaten an individual or group of individuals with punishment if they don’t act in a particular way?  Of course.  But, put this aside.

I didn’t want to discuss these issues; I wanted to discuss terrorists putting Bush in office.  Will terrorists put Bush in office – will Bush become president because of terrorists?  How could this ever happen?

It could only happen if terrorists were the cause of Bush being elected in 2004.  What would be a sufficient cause?  If terrorists impacted the vote for Bush?  Certainly this wouldn’t involve terrorists killing Kerry, or terrorists saying that they would send another plane into a building or two (after all, Bush just sat around when the planes hit the towers – who wouldn’t such an active president in the office if they wanted a passive president).  All that it would involve is people voting because they have terrorists on their mind.

If I beat a man I have impacted his decision whether he does what I tell him, or whether he goes to the police and turns me in.  Any act X has an effect upon any Y as long as Y occurs sometime after X, and Y has a relation to X.

But, it may not necessarily be a bad thing that terrorists put Bush in office – after all, Kerry only served in the military and fought as a soldier, while Bush has sent numerous young men and women to die, first against one group, then against one country, then against another country.  Bush certainly has the numbers stacking up on his side – I doubt Kerry has been the cause of so many deaths…

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[Source]