Kerry for president?
I tire of the nonsense about what Bush and Kerry did or didn’t do in the 1970s.
In a 1970 interview with the Harvard Crimson, John Kerry said, “I’m an internationalist. I’d like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations.”
Does that mean John Kerry wants our troops put into harms way only as a result of votes by Libya, Egypt and Iran?
John Kerry could never be elected president of the United States if he articulated that viewpoint today. George Bush and John Kerry were young men during the Vietnam era (as was Bill Clinton, who took extraordinary measures to avoid serving), but that’s all in the past. Besides, the Vietnam era was one of the most confusing times in American history. My concern is who these men are today.
John Kerry has proven himself adept at finding fault with this administration. But he has yet to articulate what HE stands for. Nor has he detailed HIS plan to protect America outside of saying that he would have formed a broader coalition.
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real.” Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
John Kerry testified before Congress in 1971 with these exact words: “They (American soldiers) personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam.”
Why Sen. Kerry chose to describe Americans as if we were the Nazi SS or the Taliban is beyond my understanding. During my tour in Vietnam, I landed in hundreds villages, rice paddies and various landing zones from Chu Lai to the DMZ to the Laotian border. I neither witnessed nor heard of any actions remotely resembling what Sen. Kerry has described.
We must give Sen. Kerry his bravery and service, but we should also consider his actions after his four-month tour in Vietnam when he didn’t just argue against the pursuit of the war, but made statements that were at the very least questionable and perhaps even fabrications.
But my issues with Sen. Kerry go much deeper, to wit: He voted against the Gulf War, but now claims he was in favor of it. He voted for “No Child Left Behind” but now rails against it incessantly. He voted for the Patriot Act, but now claims it’s an assault on civil liberties. He voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement, but now vituperates against the unfairness of free trade.
Please, Sen. Kerry, tell us precisely where you stand on the issues!
The idea that John Kerry’s service in Vietnam qualifies him to be commander-in-chief is akin to saying that I’m qualified to run Vail Resorts because I’m a ski instructor. John Kerry was trained in small unit military tactics 30 years ago, not global strategic defense.
Has anyone checked John Kerry’s congressional voting record lately? Congressional Quarterly examined 119 recorded votes held in 2003 in which the president had taken a position. Kerry was present for those votes only 28 percent of the time. When he did vote, he voted against the President 70 percent of the time. By contrast, even Ted Kennedy, the liberal gold standard in America, voted contrary to the president just 50 percent of the time.
The liberal Americans for Democratic Action selects key votes each year and rates lawmakers according to a perfect liberal score of 100. John Kerry has a lifetime rating of 93. Ted Kennedy has a lifetime score of 88.
Viewed from the other side, Kerry has a lifetime rating of 6 from the American Conservative Union, which uses a similar methodology to rate lawmakers according to a perfect conservative score of 100.
In good conscience voters must ask themselves if this man represents a centrist position representing the majority of Americans or is he out on the far left somewhere?
The Muslim fanatics who killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11 would have killed 30,000 or 3 million if they could have. Our (new?) president must realize that, as Nazism and Communism were the great evils of the 20th century, militant Islam in the great evil of the 21st century.
Unfortunately for Democrats (and potentially all Americans), Sen. Kerry does not understand that Iraq is not a misguided entanglement like Vietnam. We are engaged in World War III and ousting Saddam Hussein was absolutely essential to changing the dynamics that led to the events of Sept. 11.
We may debate the best strategies to fight this war. But to ignore the fact that we are at war is both naive and dangerous.
That Sen. Kerry views this war as a police action to be overseen by the U.N. is what makes him a clear and present danger to the security of United States.
Butch Mazzuca of Singletree, a local real estate broker and a ski instructor, writes a weekly column for the Daily. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
Support Local Journalism
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User