Kerry: Treason? You Decide

[MtnBiker]

Yet Kerry's vote count broke the record for the most votes ever casted for a losing candidate!

So what you are saying is Kerry is the biggest loser in history?

 

[MtnBiker]

I'm a Democrat and personally I'd prefer to see a midwesterner like Evan Bayh, Russ Feingold, or Tom Vilsack get the nomination. The idea of a moderate, midwestern Democrat at the top of ticket scares the hell out of Republicans. Rudy Giuliani will not win the GOP nomination because he's a New York liberal. He's pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and moderate on gun issues, all things that don't sit well with your buddies at Focus on the Family, the Christian Coaltion, and the other far-right groups that own and operate the GOP.

As for whether or not Kerry committed Treason, who cares. He didn't win the presidency, he's back in the Senate, and it's up to the people of Massachussets whether to keep him there.

acludem

Nice post.

 

[Annie]

I thought the other was descriptive of Kerry, but this depicts my feelings much more closely. Links at site.

http://moxie.nu/moveabletype/archives/003272.php

This post has a preface:

In order to save time, I would like to note for the record other lefties equally disgusted me yesterday. Namely the bloated, drunkard Ted Kennedy, Ron Reagan Jr. (god almighty, what a disgrace to the namesake of a true saint of democracy), the life-sized weeble known as Oliver Willis, the Democratic Underground and just about every other douchebag who has refused and still refuses to see the joy in someone else's success. Also, all the demented folks who refuse to see that the US presence in Iraq isn't an occupation, a quest for oil, but rather is and always has been a war on terror, tyranny, and a liberation of the Iraqi people. My advice to those suffering from brain-rot? Just shut up. Watch. Learn.

Anyone with an IQ higher than my cat was teary eyed seeing our military's YEARS of work, actually working for the Iraqis. There are no two ways about it.

We don't vote when it rains. Or if it's a bad hair day. Or if the car is low on gas, and it's late and the polling place is a whole 3 miles away. And it's dark. Or too early. Or we are too busy having lunch, or the dog needs to go to the vet to get its nails clipped.

Those 8 million Iraqi people faced death to vote.

The only people working against the Iraqis seem to be the Saddam leftovers, parts of Europe, the UN and American media and Democrats.

Anyone with a heart was proud of the coalition...it's easy to do good things for your own country. It's much, much harder to sacrifice for another country. And our beauteous military along with a coalition of many, many countries did just that.

Yes, the world will benefit too -- even the liberals who opposed this will benefit and would rather die than admit it.

But for those of us who love America, the beauty and payoff was seeing the joy (of those who previously had to vote for Saddam or face his assassins) vote yesterday for what they believed. Without fear.

Here at the compound, I've been celebrating. My life-sized Dick Cheney doll was pulled from its undisclosed location for the occasion....so some random, unedited thoughts follow.

- I hope Ted Kennedy marinated his crow in jack daniels, vodka and rum. Preferably all three. (Maybe Steve H. can make a sore-loser liberal crow cookbook for the mentally ill and perpetually drunk). Ted can smoke his alcohol soaked crow in crashed-car exhaust before eating.

- That long faced presidential loser on Meet the Press, (my favorite Sunday morning program) made me nauseous. And this was initially the topic of my post...but I have digressed...

John Kerry made me nauseous -- for the future of democracy.

His party is named after what we live and breathe here in the United States and yet the guy who could have been president (if the majority of the US bought into Michael Moore, Dan Rather and their ilk) HATES what makes us a great and free country.

John Kerry despises America, democracy and our military so much he is willing to sacrifice our security. He wants our soldiers to die for naught.

Sure, Kerry was willing to betray his Vietnam brothers. That's old news. But the man who wanted to be Commander in Chief has publicly downplayed our current military's efforts and their successes one too many times.

Luckily I had Meet the Press on DVR and didn't have to face that fiction-writer first thing in the morning.

While watching it in small bits, I couldn't help but think fiction writing would be the ideal profession for John Kerry. He spins tall tales as easily as he finds rich women to marry.

Revisionist history writer.
Fantasy political fiction.
I won the election before I lost it.
How to marry an Heiress.
Elections aren't democracy. Unless the majority votes Democrat.
Or, quite simply -- I'm a liar and sore-loser.

If god-forbid, he had been elected on November 2nd, Kerry would be talking about the great success of Iraqi elections. All based, of course on what happened in the last few years under GWB.

But that was not to be.

Instead Kerry (last year's news) had a redux on Meet the Press about the Cambodia incident, which is SEARED, seared in his memory.

Now of course we the reasonable people on the right think, "Russert, why didn't you ask these questions back in July or August? Why didn't you call him on his fiction then?"

I am kind on Tim Russert. The liberal host doesn't wear a halo but is okay in my book, he's pretty tough on everyone. That puts him miles above the likes of Dan Rather and the other weasels.

Kerry once again makes his "lucky hat" reappear from his seared ass -- this hat came from a CIA operative during their trip into Cambodia in 1968, 1969, in never-never-land or maybe at the river bordering Jackson's Neverland Ranch.

According to Kerry's spokesperson, this memory was mixed up with another memory.

That memory was ALSO seared in his memory, onto another seared memory onto yet another memory that he threw in his hope chest before he found Terry Kerry.

After downplaying the Iraqis' great moment in history, Kerry claimed that the Cambodian incident in which his boat was shot at by the Khmer Rouge (to Kerry, Khmer Rouge is a fancy French red wine) was confused with another top secret trip wherein he delivered WEAPONS to the Khmer Rouge.

Make sense?

If so you may be a Democrat (and I can try to find you a good therapist to help).

The KR didn't really exist in 1968. Or 1969. Except in John Grisham novels and John Kerry's smoked memory.

"Where is my mythical hat? Why didn't I wear it during election night?"

I hated to even talk about this, but Kerry making light of what happened in Iraq yesterday -- he deserves a very hard spanking.

About 8 million smacks on the ass.

 

[hylandrdet]

I'm a Democrat and personally I'd prefer to see a midwesterner like Evan Bayh, Russ Feingold, or Tom Vilsack get the nomination. The idea of a moderate, midwestern Democrat at the top of ticket scares the hell out of Republicans. Rudy Giuliani will not win the GOP nomination because he's a New York liberal. He's pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and moderate on gun issues, all things that don't sit well with your buddies at Focus on the Family, the Christian Coaltion, and the other far-right groups that own and operate the GOP.

As for whether or not Kerry committed Treason, who cares. He didn't win the presidency, he's back in the Senate, and it's up to the people of Massachussets whether to keep him there.

acludem

Acludem, as much as I like your choices, I prefer to stick with Kerry.

The GOP is out of bullets with their so called "success" of the Iraqi election; they must now hope that GW's domestic policies can keep the momentum going thorugh 2008. Just one problem...What domestic policies?

 

[Avatar4321]

Acludem, as much as I like your choices, I prefer to stick with Kerry.

The GOP is out of bullets with their so called "success" of the Iraqi election; they must now hope that GW's domestic policies can keep the momentum going thorugh 2008. Just one problem...What domestic policies?

Social security reform
Tort reform
Immigration
Tax Reform
More education reforms

I think the more appropriate question is what Domestic policies do the Democrats have?

 

[MtnBiker]

I think the more appropriate question is what Domestic policies do the Democrats have?

Opposing the Republicans

 

[CSM]

...
Seriously, who's going to beat John Kerry in 2008?

Just about anyone else who runs ... including any other Democrat. Remember Al Gore??? Strange, no one else does either.

 

[Adam's Apple]

Kerry Reminds Voters Why They Rejected Him
By David Limbaugh for Jewish World Review
February 1, 2005

Ted Kennedy's contemptible foreign policy speech deliberately timed just prior to the Iraqi election was bad enough. But Kennedy didn't just come within one state's electors of becoming president. John Kerry did, and his regrettable remarks on "Meet the Press" demonstrate how scary that is.

Kerry made so many objectionable statements it's hard to know where to begin. He couldn't complete a paragraph perfunctorily praising our troops before he began issuing disclaimers. "No one in the United States should try to overhype this election."

First, no one in the Bush Administration is saying our work in Iraq is complete. They acknowledge the election was just the beginning. Several pivotal steps remain before the adoption of the Iraqi Constitution and we're still feverishly training Iraqi security forces.

Having said that, I do think we should be touting this election as the monumentally historic event that it was. Indeed how can we overstate the significance of this incredible day and the remarkable courage of the Iraqi people?

We should rejoice at their unequivocal affirmation of the universal human longing for freedom. Their enthusiastic embracement of the democratic process stands as a disciplinary repudiation of those glibly contending that certain cultures, such as Islamic ones, are inherently unreceptive to self-rule.

If 72 percent of the registered Iraqi voters had cast their ballots in a completely risk-free climate, we would be shouting to the rooftops with glee. But every single voter went to the polls knowing he or she could be killed. Does this not put the lie to the endless refrain that the Iraqi people reject us as "occupiers" instead of welcoming us as "liberators"? You can't tell me the Iraqi people aren't supportive of America's action in deposing Saddam Hussein when three fourths of them chose to participate in the democratic process.

This election was about the sovereignty of the Iraqi people, the rejection of terrorist brutality, and G-d willing, the potential transformation of the Mideast. But it was not about France, Germany, or any other nations that stubbornly, and wrongly, refused to join the right side of history in the War in Iraq. But you'd never know that from listening to John Kerry, who, sadly, is still imprisoned in the pathetic quagmire of his "multilateralist" mindset.

Even on the heels of this profoundly gratifying election en route to liberating the long-oppressed and beleaguered Iraqi people, John Kerry couldn't resist the perverse temptation to resurrect his manufactured criticism of President Bush's "unilateral" approach to the war. It was a phony, desperate after-the-fact charge then, and it is even more so now. If you didn't understand before that Kerry was always just blowing smoke about President Bush's supposed alienation of the global community, you should see it clearly now.

Kerry said, "This election is a sort of demarcation point, and what really counts now is the effort to have a legitimate political reconciliation, and it's going to take a massive diplomatic effort and a much more significant outreach to the international community than this administration has been willing to engage in. Absent that, we will not be successful in Iraq."

This nonsense was bad enough during the election, but we can't let Kerry get away with this kind of inane, destructive rhetoric now. What in the world does he mean by a legitimate political reconciliation, a massive diplomatic effort, a significant outreach to the international community?

What does diplomacy between the United States and Old Europe, or Russia, have to do with the ultimate success of Iraqi democracy? Why should we be reaching out to those recalcitrant nations that shamefully refused to do the right thing? If there's any mea culpas owed or sucking up to be done they should come from Old Europe and Russia.

Kerry's gratuitous invocation of "multilateralism" yet again is only noteworthy because it is a classic example of the utter inability of this exemplar of nuance to cut through to the heart of an issue. It might be the most egregious non sequitur uttered by a public official in recent memory.

The only thing useful about Kerry's analysis is that it can serve as a sobering reminder of how fortunate the United States, the Iraqi people and all freedom-loving peoples of the world are that Kerry lost Ohio.

If Kerry is entertaining fantasies of running again in 2008, his handlers ought to at least suggest a new mantra — one with a fighting chance of signaling that he has a clue about what is important. Until then, he'll be nothing more than a washed-up wind-up doll spouting "unilateralism," no matter the question, no matter the reality, and history will march on without him.

 

[Merlin1047]

I'm just a student from history. GW was an incumbent, during a wartime situation; if you do your research, you'll find that the odds of beating such an incumbent are almost impossible. Yet Kerry's vote count broke the record for the most votes ever casted for a losing candidate! America want him in, just not right now!

Well it's readily obvious that you're not a student of the english language.

But snide comments aside, I very much doubt that you qualify as a student of anything. Student status infers that one learns about a given subject. You obviously have not learned a thing. Your pathetic insistence that kerry will return from the dead is proof positive that you are incapable of learning, because in order to learn, one must be willing to accept facts. You obviously prefer to live in your Bush-hating fantasy world.

Kerry will never again see the light of day in a presidential race, even if the entire Demo party consisted of deluded half-wits like yourself. Hellary Clinton will see to that.

And here's the main reason you will lose the next election - you will have lost your main issue. The primary factor galvanizing rabid libs in the last election was the frenzy of hatred you petty little gnomes feel for Pres. Bush. Since he cannot run again, what will you use to get your peers to stop posting their conspiracy theories on the internet long enough to go vote?

Face it, you and your party are a pathetic joke and an embarrassment to the country.

 

[Merlin1047]

As for whether or not Kerry committed Treason, who cares. He didn't win the presidency, he's back in the Senate, and it's up to the people of Massachussets whether to keep him there.

acludem

You people make we want to barf. When one of your own dishonors his uniform, disgraces the nation and commits acts which are arguably treasonous, it's "who cares".

Well, don't look now junior, but a LOT of us care. Once a traitor, always a traitor.