|
Techniguy 10-31-2006
John Kerry has really put his foot in his mouth this time and
exposed himself as the most despicable, arrogant,
and egotistical liar that has ever been elected to
office. This time he has really shown everyone exactly who he
is and how he thinks.
On Monday, Kerry said to a group of students at Pasadena City
College, just outside of Los Angeles "You know, education, if
you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and
you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you
get stuck in Iraq."
What he said might have applied during Vietnam when we had a
draft, but certainly not now. Many of the guys in Iraq
could put him to shame on intelligence and education. They are
not there because of failing academics as we all know. There
are there out of patriotism, a love for their country, and a will to
defend it and freedom everywhere.
President Bush came out angerly on Tuesday saying Kerry owes
all of our brave troops an apology. I say he owes not
only the troops and apology, but the president, the
families of our troops, and this entire country.
In his own defense, Kerry said on Tuesday that he was talking
about the President, not the troops calling it "a botched joke
about the president and the president's people, not about the troops
... and they know that's what I was talking about."
He went on to say; "I'm sick and tired of a bunch of
despicable Republicans who will not debate real policy, who won't
take responsibility for their own mistakes, standing up and trying
to make other people the butt of those mistakes," he said. "It
disgusts me that a bunch of these Republican hacks who've never worn
the uniform of our country are willing to lie about those who
did."
A joke? What is funny about smearing the President of our
country and calling his policies "a failure" as Kerry has so often
done? Where is the joke in that? Is Kerry simply trying
to lie his way out of a major political blunder, or is it possible
that he really was referring to the President in his convoluted
remark?
From Kerry's previous remarks about the military and the troops
dating back to his treasonous comments about troops fighting in
Vietnam, to his calling of the troops in
Iraq "terrorists", there is no question that he loaths the
military and has no respect for our men in uniform. What he
said, whether it was taken the way he meant it or not, represents
exactly how he feels about our soldiers. Having said
that, let's take a closer look at what he said and his defense
of it.
He was speaking in the context of college students and why they
should endeavor to exceed in college. President Bush is not in
college so if Kerry really was referring to the President, then his
remark was completely out of context and nothing more than an
opportunity to smear the President.
If he was referring to the President, as he says, then what he
was saying was that President Bush was an academic failure and an
idiot and that is why our troops are stuck in Iraq. This is
the interpretation Kerry is trying to put on his remark now.
But if that were true, then what does that make Kerry himself?
Bush's grade average in college was higher than Kerry's. Kerry
was talking to college students, about being a student in
college. How in the world does President Bush fit into that
context?
Whether Kerry was referring to President Bush or the troops
makes little difference now. The Republicans and the American
people heard what they heard and the smear against the troops is now
being carved into the campaign stone by Republicans with
only a week remaining until the election. Regardless of what
Kerry meant, he is going to be labeled with this smear of the troops
and the same tactic Democrats have been using against Republicans
when they "misspeak" will be used against him. It's about time
they get a taste of their own medicine. As Lynn Cheney
recently told Wolf Blitzer on CNN; "It's time Republicans stood up
and fought back at the Democrats".
Democrat pundits are saying now that it doesn't really matter
because Kerry isn't running for office in this election. At
the same time, they have been basing their entire campaign for their
candidates on anti-Bush rhetoric, but Bush isn't running for office
in this election cycle either, so does that make their entire
campaign irrelevant?
Why it does matter is because Kerry is the leader and the face
of today's Democratic Party and that face is going to reflect on all
Democrats running for office, just as Dems think that their
distorted and misleading depiction of Bush will reflect on all
Republican candidates running for office now.
It's all about Iraq which Democrats believe is an utter failure
and we cannot win, thanks to people like John Kerry, John Murtha,
Ted Kennedy, and others who have been doing everything they can to
undermine the war effort from Washington while hoping they can
succeed in causing it's failure by breaking the will of the American
people to support the troops and achieve victory.
Kerry keeps saying the Bush policy on Iraq is a failure, this
is the biggest lie of them all. It is true that there are
major problems right now in Iraq, but that is not because of Bush
policy or because of Bush. The problems are a result of the
nature of Iraq itself and because the Iraqi government refuses
to take a stand against the insurgents. Malaki insists on
allowing his buddy, al Sadr, to run free with his band of killers
and is afraid to stop them or just doesn't want to.
The big headline for the Dems is "This month has been the worst
month for American deaths in Iraq since October of 2005". Gee,
what a coincidence! Imagine, the month of Rhamadan was in
the same month last year as this year. That is what radical
Islamists do during Rhamadan, go out and kill as many Americans as
possible, the religion demands it. Because of this, the media
has been reporting that "things are getting worse." Will they
be as eager to report that things are getting better next month when
the killings go down? Don't hold your breath.
Consider what Iraq was like before we invaded. Saddam was
in power and kept the peace by torturing and killing anyone who
would disturb it. This is all Iraqis ever knew and when we
brought freedom to them, they went freedom crazy and immediately
fell into anarchy with their looting of Baghdad and running wild in
the streets shooting off guns. Now it's like corralling a
whole country full of wild animals, trying to get them to live
together in peace, and no American administration policy would have
made any difference except for the same kind of policy that
Saddam used. We didn't go into Iraq to occupy the country and
suppress the people, we went there to free them and now they're
drunk with their new found freedom.
There is a power struggle for control of the country in spite
of the duly elected government and al Qaeda terrorists are adding
fuel to the fire. The Iraqi police and army are
poorly equipped and not yet well enough trained to control the
violence, it will take time, more time than it would take to
democratize an already civilized nation or nations as happened in
WWII. Democracy is all new to Iraqis and they haven't learned
it yet. They haven't yet learned to love, respect, and defend
their own country. In time, they will with our help.
We went into Iraq to do this job in 2003 because everyone
agreed that it had to be done, and that included John Kerry.
Had Kerry won the election in 2004, what would his policy on Iraq
be? What would his plan be? For that matter, what would
any Democrat's plan be? Who knows? They never have
suggested one other than their usual "cut and run". In the
2004 campaign, Kerry indicated that his plan would be similar to the
Bush plan. In fact, there was a nearly identical, word
for word description of it posted on his website. Now,
suddenly that plan is a failure and it's all Bush's fault?
But what happens if we cut and run? We all know the
answer to that. The terrorists sympathetic to Osama Bin Ladden
will take over the government and the oil. With the oil money
they can easily buy the bomb on the black market. Terrorists
will have a new training ground and state sponsor to help them
launch attacks on America and American interests
globally. This would be the result of a Kerry policy
today.
Just who does he think he is to be criticizing President
Bush? I do know one thing, Kerry thinks he is a whole lot
smarter than he actually is and he wants everyone else to think that
too. He is an arrogant, selfish, egotistical, communist
monster in our midst who belongs in prison for treason in
attempting to undermine the national security and the
government of our country. He is not a loyal enough
American to be serving in Congress, his loyalties are elsewhere, if
he has any at all other than to himself.
Bush will not pull out of Iraq until the Iraqi government has
full control over the country and is able to maintain it's security
for very good reason. It is much better for the US to have
Iraq as an ally than an enemy in a region of the world that spawns
terrorism. That is why Iraq is such an important battle in the
War on Terror whether Democrats want to admit it or not.
Osama bin Ladden and Ayman al Zawahiri certainly see Iraq as
the center of the War on Terror and have often said so. You
would think that if Democrats won't believe President Bush, and
oppose him so much on Iraq, that then they would at least
believe the people they seem to support in al Qaeda. At
least Bush and al Qaeda agree on one thing, that the center of the
terrorist's war against the United States is in Baghdad.
One more thing. Iraq is not in a civil war. Sunni,
Shia, and al Qaeda gangs are attacking each other in and around
Baghdad only, where they can get good press coverage. The rest
of Iraq is peaceful. This war is all about media coverage and
propaganda, something John Kerry uses all the time but still doesn't
understand how our enemies use it, and him as a source for it.
That is not what I would call "being smart", a term Kerry
often applies to himself.
ã Copyright 2006 by Techniguy.com All Rights
Reserved.
Reproduction of this article is permitted providing this
copyright and author is included.
| 