Monday, May 10, 2004

Kerry Kritiques
I'm way to busy to write much, but I read a couple interesting things, so I will toss them up here. VDH has a very long and very interesting essay in the WSJ on The Wages of Appeasement.

Diplomats might argue that our past efforts at humanitarian reconstruction, with some idealistic commitment to consensual government, have a far better track record in Germany, Japan, Korea, Panama and Serbia than our strategy of exiting Germany after World War I, of leaving Iraq to Saddam after 1991, of abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban once the Russians were stopped, of skipping out from Haiti or of fleeing Somalia. Realist students of arms control might argue that the recent confessions of Pakistan's nuclear roguery, the surrender of the Libyan arsenal, and the invitation of the U.N. inspectors into Iran were the dividends of resolute American action in Iraq. Moammar Gadhafi surely came clean not because of Jimmy Carter's peace missions, U.N. resolutions, or European diplomats.

But don't expect any sober discussion of these contentions from the left. Their gloom and doom about Iraq arises precisely from the anti-Americanism and romanticization of the Third World that once led to our appeasement and now seeks its return.

The always superb Mark Steyn took a stick to Kerry in today's Washington Times. He focuses in on Kerry's new habit of blaming each faux paus on his speech writer. Obviously, this is cowardly and dishonest, but what really gets me is that the lies are so transparent that they are really an insult to my intelligence. Kerry claims that he did not really mean that outsourcing CEOs are Benedict Arnolds (speechwriter's fault) and that he did not really want to make Dhimmi Carter a Middle East envoy (speechwriter's fault). Steyn clarrifies:

I mean, OK, it was what he was saying in the narrow technical sense of words emerging from his lips, day after day, night after night, all through primary season.
"The candidate eventually did speak with Carter but only after noticing that a draft of his speech said that he spoke with Carter." Those pesky speechwriters again. As Slate's Mickey Kaus mused, what's next? "Kerry reveals he went to Vietnam after reading a draft of his autobiography that said he went to Vietnam?"
Who is John Kerry? They weren't his medals he threw away, just those of some non-name World War II vet he happened to bump into. That's not his four gas-guzzling SUVs in the driveway, just ones owned by his "family." They're not his words coming out of his mouth, just words wholly owned and operated by employees of a subsidiary unit of his wife's holding company, Benedict Arnold Heinz Kerry Campaign Rhetoric Inc, registered in Bermuda.
It takes a big man to blame everyone around him. Which is at last a rationale for the Kerry campaign: If you're the kind of fellow who likes blaming your underlings, at least when you're president there's no end of underlings to blame.

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?