Intellectual Defenestration

I Don't Understand

From Dean's blog was a link to this article, in which Dean stated (among other things):

Dr. Dean said he expects jobs to be the primary issue in next year's general election, and he expects Ohio to be the critical swing state. But he spent most of the interview answering questions about foreign policy, attacking President Bush on Iraq and North Korea and promising to send former President Bill Clinton to the Middle East as a peace broker.

President Bush, Dr. Dean said, is "particularly poorly suited" for foreign policy "because he has a black and white view of the world, and foreign policy depends on enormous understandings of nuances and trade-offs."

This critique of Bush, that he isn't "nuanced", is something that the Democrat party has been using quite a bit. I do not understand what that means. This is not a political rant or a criticism of Dean or the other Democrats. I genuinely wish someone would explain this to me, or show me where that is explained. I plan on voting in the upcoming election and would like to be as well informed as possible.

Specifically, what would a nuanced foreign policy be in response to the threat of global terrorism? If Bush had been properly nuanced in the last 2 years, what would he have done differently? And, why would a nuanced foreign policy be better than a "black-and-white" one?

So, on the offhand chance that a poli-sci expert happens to peruse this (highly unlikely), or even if someone who knows more than I do on these matters (significantly more likely), please leave a comment.

October 10, 2003 10:39 AM