The Great Equivocator Bows Out
Sen. John F. Kerry: I decided not to run, after deciding to run, for how do I ask a man to be the first man to get stuck in my mistake (my campaign)?
There was one article, two columns and one editorial on The Great Equivocator, the denigrator of active swift-boat servicemen and women, the political coward, Sen. John F. Kerry, bowing out of the 2008 Presidential contest in the Boston Globe of January 25, 2007. In all of them, the writers are absolutely delusional about the talent, character and courage of this pathetic, opportunist; the writers also displayed a remarkable unacquaintance with fact.
From the article, Charting a future as Senator Kerry, “With Democrats now controlling Congress (Blogger’s Note: on the strength of re-electing a former KKK Kleagle, Sen. Robert C. Byrd), Kerry decided he can best serve the causes he believes in by not running for President, because that frees him to pursue legislative solutions without regard for national political consequences . . . “
First, there simply are NO causes that the Senator “believes in” other than the enrichment of Sen. John F. Kerry. To suggest otherwise is to deny the Senator’s every action. Every utterance. Every writing.
“They’re not my SUVs, they’re my wife’s.”
“Though I believe life begins at conception, I will not impose my will on others.”
Second, even when the Senator cared about “national political consequences” there is NO modest legislation, let alone significant legislation, with his name on it. He’s been able to exist in the United States Senate for over 20 years without accomplishing or contributing ANYTHING.
From the column, Kerry finds clarity, “While Kerry appeared out of step with much of the electorate on the war in 2004, much of the country now joins him in scorning it.”
Wow! What a bunch of garbage. The second half of the sentence implies Sen. Kerry was against the war in 2004. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have written so many times in this space, in August 2004, from the rim of the Grand Canyon, Sen. Kerry made his famous “if I knew then what I know now, I still would have voted for the war” speech.
And, the second half of the sentence implies people joined a position that Sen. Kerry led them to. My goodness, to imply Sen. Kerry is a leader of men and women is laughable. He’s never, ever led anything (except maybe his own cheerleading). He is doing exactly as I said (I’m ZACKlyRight, after all) someone in the Democrat Party would:
On August 23, 2005, in this space, go look it up, I wrote, “If the "position" of the Democrat Party is withdrawal, then shouldn't someone in the Party be saying that right now? Even Sen. Russ Feingold (D, Minnesota), arguably the most vocal Senator against the war on terror, doesn't even call for an immediate pull-out. If the position of the Democrat Party is not pull-out, is one of these Senators going to try to "time" their flip-flop just as the Party's hatred for all things George W. Bush reaches a critical mass? Will the Party really nominate the person that tries to steal the drum major's staff?”
From the second column, For Kerry, a new mission, “ . . . he can become a senator who tells the hard truths this nation needs to hear. And if we ever needed an uncowed truth-teller on the international scene, the time is now.”
First, I have no clue what the columnist means by “hard truths this nation needs to hear.” If anyone can help me, please let me know.
Second, it will be interesting to see how the liberal media discerns “uncowed truth-telling” when Vietnam war hero and Vietnam POW, Sen. John McCain makes statements contrary to anything the Great Equivocator says.
Finally, from the editorial, Kerry keeps his hat on, writing of the Senator’s failed 2004 Presidential bid, “Vocal Vietnam veterans opposed him because he had spoken against their war.” NO! Vocal Vietnam veterans opposed him because he had spoken against THEM!
I regret that Sen. John F. Kerry will be one of my United States Senators for a very long time to come.
The Boston Globe had the opening line of this post as a letter to the editor very early yesterday afternoon; it was not published today.
Sen. John F. Kerry: I decided not to run, after deciding to run, for how do I ask a man to be the first man to get stuck in my mistake (my campaign)?
There was one article, two columns and one editorial on The Great Equivocator, the denigrator of active swift-boat servicemen and women, the political coward, Sen. John F. Kerry, bowing out of the 2008 Presidential contest in the Boston Globe of January 25, 2007. In all of them, the writers are absolutely delusional about the talent, character and courage of this pathetic, opportunist; the writers also displayed a remarkable unacquaintance with fact.
From the article, Charting a future as Senator Kerry, “With Democrats now controlling Congress (Blogger’s Note: on the strength of re-electing a former KKK Kleagle, Sen. Robert C. Byrd), Kerry decided he can best serve the causes he believes in by not running for President, because that frees him to pursue legislative solutions without regard for national political consequences . . . “
First, there simply are NO causes that the Senator “believes in” other than the enrichment of Sen. John F. Kerry. To suggest otherwise is to deny the Senator’s every action. Every utterance. Every writing.
“They’re not my SUVs, they’re my wife’s.”
“Though I believe life begins at conception, I will not impose my will on others.”
Second, even when the Senator cared about “national political consequences” there is NO modest legislation, let alone significant legislation, with his name on it. He’s been able to exist in the United States Senate for over 20 years without accomplishing or contributing ANYTHING.
From the column, Kerry finds clarity, “While Kerry appeared out of step with much of the electorate on the war in 2004, much of the country now joins him in scorning it.”
Wow! What a bunch of garbage. The second half of the sentence implies Sen. Kerry was against the war in 2004. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have written so many times in this space, in August 2004, from the rim of the Grand Canyon, Sen. Kerry made his famous “if I knew then what I know now, I still would have voted for the war” speech.
And, the second half of the sentence implies people joined a position that Sen. Kerry led them to. My goodness, to imply Sen. Kerry is a leader of men and women is laughable. He’s never, ever led anything (except maybe his own cheerleading). He is doing exactly as I said (I’m ZACKlyRight, after all) someone in the Democrat Party would:
On August 23, 2005, in this space, go look it up, I wrote, “If the "position" of the Democrat Party is withdrawal, then shouldn't someone in the Party be saying that right now? Even Sen. Russ Feingold (D, Minnesota), arguably the most vocal Senator against the war on terror, doesn't even call for an immediate pull-out. If the position of the Democrat Party is not pull-out, is one of these Senators going to try to "time" their flip-flop just as the Party's hatred for all things George W. Bush reaches a critical mass? Will the Party really nominate the person that tries to steal the drum major's staff?”
From the second column, For Kerry, a new mission, “ . . . he can become a senator who tells the hard truths this nation needs to hear. And if we ever needed an uncowed truth-teller on the international scene, the time is now.”
First, I have no clue what the columnist means by “hard truths this nation needs to hear.” If anyone can help me, please let me know.
Second, it will be interesting to see how the liberal media discerns “uncowed truth-telling” when Vietnam war hero and Vietnam POW, Sen. John McCain makes statements contrary to anything the Great Equivocator says.
Finally, from the editorial, Kerry keeps his hat on, writing of the Senator’s failed 2004 Presidential bid, “Vocal Vietnam veterans opposed him because he had spoken against their war.” NO! Vocal Vietnam veterans opposed him because he had spoken against THEM!
I regret that Sen. John F. Kerry will be one of my United States Senators for a very long time to come.
The Boston Globe had the opening line of this post as a letter to the editor very early yesterday afternoon; it was not published today.
posted by Zack at 6:14 PM
3 Comments:
U R Gr8!
Another pro-Kerry column today (January 26) in the Globe - "he's ready to battle" claims the title of the column - that's hysterical; after 22 years of doing nothing in the Senate, nows he ready to battle.
No letters yet; they should come tomorrow; I'll keep you posted.
as long as we're talking massachusetts politics...didn't catch any coverage in the Globe on 2/13 re: Deval Patrick's use of a state police helicopter, but did catch a piece in the Herald. I recall jane swift getting skewered over the same issue by the Globies...
Post a Comment
<< Home