Desperate Hours: John Kerry's October Surprises backfire

printer-friendly version is copy/pasteable:

From www.MichNews.com

Guest
Desperate Hours: John Kerry’s October Surprises backfire
By Doug Schmitz
Nov 2, 2004, 16:20

After attempting to destroy President Bush’s credibility with the American public for the third time in seven weeks, John Kerry’s coordinated efforts with the New York Times, CBS News and “60 Minutes” to push the fabricated “missing” explosives non-story have now backfired, although other media leftists are still “reporting” it as fact – especially with nearly 90 percent of the news media voting for Kerry.

“Both the New York Times and CBS have repeatedly shown they have chosen sides against President Bush in this election,” said Brent Bozell, director of the Media Research Center (Oct. 26, 2004). “The Times, CBS News, and 60 Minutes especially, have proven beyond all doubt they are nothing more than extensions of the Democratic National Committee and they have no credibility whatsoever.”

Recall that the Kerry campaign tried to hijack the election before with the patently criminal help of Dan Rather, who intentionally used bogus memos in the hopes of nailing Bush, while ABC News nonchalantly told its staff to go easy on Kerry and purposely discredit Bush. Nonetheless, despite Bush being vindicated in what likely has been found to be WMDs moved out months before our troops entered Iraq, Kerry, knowing the explosives tale was false, once again had made himself an enemy of the U.S. and slandered our military by repeating the same kind of anti-American propaganda he spewed out 33 years ago.

Within just days of the 2004 election, the pro-Kerry media were in full panic mode and fiercely launched the biggest 11th-hour, non-stop assault on President Bush by grasping at every available straw: From their orchestrated non-story of “missing” explosives to hyped Halliburton charges, their expressed goal was to derail Bush’s re-election chances, while CNN, MSNBC and PBS’ Frontline were busy airing endless fluff pieces praising Kerry’s so-called “valor.” It was also no surprise that CNN did fluff pieces on their anti-Semitic hero, Yassar Arafat, as well as an anti-Bush hit piece about a few disgruntled Iraq war veterans spouting anti-war sentiments against Bush, or that CNN, now “KNN,” the “Kerry News Network,” reported Tuesday from a Mosque, where polling was held.

In essence, the pro-Kerry media insisted on propping up the U.N.-worshipping John Kerry by severely downplaying his past, present and future anti-Americanism. It’s more proof that Kerry and his allies at the New York Times, CBS News and “60 Minutes” have learned absolutely nothing from Dan Rather’s own Internet-thwarted election thievery attempt that cost him not only more viewers but also exposed his utter duplicity in trying to bring down another U.S. Republican president in a time of war.

Since Rather was busted for his phony faxed memos, “60 Minutes” eventually pulled the plug on their bogus non-story about the “missing” explosives it planned to air as an October Surprise on Oct. 31. But “60 Minutes,” that same night, tried a backdoor approach to smear Bush before the election. In a last-ditch effort to “get” Bush, while trying to make Kerry look “presidential,” “60 Minutes” aired an anti-Bush hit piece about U.S. troops purportedly lacking body armor (which Kerry voted against and “60 Minutes” never mentioned), as liberal anchor Steve Kroft claimed. In effect, “60 Minutes” intentionally lied to make it sound like Bush never provided enough equipment, when Gen. Tommy Franks had long since debunked that “60 Minutes” lie.

PRO-KERRY MEDIA’S PROPAGANDA SCAM LARGEST SINCE 1992

Not since running the largest PR scam to protect Bill Clinton from scandal in 1992 have the elite media displayed such egregious partisanship in trying to get another Democrat elected and another Republican president out of office. While blatantly ignoring Democrats committing massive voter fraud in the key battleground states, the partisan press alone, for the last four years, has been guilty of committing the largest case of voter fraud by purposely lying about Bush, while covering up Kerry’s well-documented, three-decade history of political opportunism and treason against the U.S.

“Because of their bias, a large number of people remain in the dark about who John Kerry really is, which is alarming,” said Townhall.com columnist David Limbaugh. “I dare say that if they had not sheltered Kerry’s past and his official record, if they hadn’t conspired with Democrats to bring down President Bush, Kerry would be lucky to receive 40 percent of the popular vote.”

In fact, showing that the Bush-hating media’s overt biases never take a vacation, even on election day, ABC News correspondent Ann Compton opined that after the President and First Lady Laura Bush voted, “there wasn’t a joyous display” on their faces, adding that Laura “sadly” clutched Bush’s hand as they left the polling place.

“Of all the outrageous aspects of this year’s presidential campaign, nothing exceeds the Old Media’s overt mission to defeat President Bush,” Limbaugh added. “They’ve always been biased, but this year, they barely tried to hide it.”

This is especially true since they have desperately tried to shield Kerry from being held accountable for spewing off such anti-American statements about the Iraq war, in which he has called a “nuisance,” a “mistake,” a “colossal error in judgment,” a “diversion,” “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time,” a “miscalculation” and claimed that Bush “outsourced” the Tora Bora operation to local Afghan warlords.

National Review’s Jed Babbin (Nov. 1, 2004) said although Kerry’s searing indictment of President Bush was meant to try to reverse the public’s confidence in President Bush, “just like [Kerry’s] claim that America is suffering 90 percent of the casualties in Iraq and paying 90 percent of the costs, it just isn’t true.”

Now, what kind of message does Kerry’s anti-American diatribes send to our troops – and our enemies? Apparently, Kerry’s long-time supporter Osama bin Laden is listening.

MEDIA LEFTISTS REWARD KERRY WITH LIFETIME OF FREE PASSES

Yet in return for his betrayal of America and our troops in a time of war the last three decades, however, John Kerry has been rewarded with a lifetime’s worth of free media passes by Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and countless other terrorist-friendly media cabals on the Left. Kerry has also hit the once-in-a-lifetime, multi-billion dollar jackpot – twice. First, by marrying the Heinz ketchup heiress; and second, by getting the financial backing of George Soros, a convicted insider-trading kook and the Far Left wing of the Democratic Party’s favorite anti-American sugar daddy, who has spent nearly $25 million in a frantic, albeit, felonious attempt to buy Kerry the White House. And all with the blessing of Kerry’s media allies, who are salivating over the spurious al-Qaqaa non-story they’ve conjured up to help Kerry spread even more lies about President Bush.

“Our plan was to run the story on October 31,” admitted Jeff Fager, “60 Minutes” executive producer, “but it became clear that it wouldn’t hold.” Here’s a confession of a politically motivated and calculated plot to sway the election against Bush and “60 Minutes” claimed it couldn’t find enough to run with it? Well, it’s never stopped them before. And, as usual, it certainly never stopped Kerry from running with yet another lie.

In fact, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty told Fox News (Oct. 29, 2004) that Kerry has been “reckless” in his relentless pursuit of phony newspaper stories in order to gain political points. Of course, the New York Times, CBS News and “60 Minutes” never bothered to contact the Pentagon when our troops did in fact have a weapons plan and have already removed more than 700,000 tons of explosives (or WMDs). Suddenly, the partisan press believes there were WMDs when they have routinely called Bush a liar? It’s also more evidence of how Kerry and John Edwards take the word of the partisan press over our own U.S. military every single time.

Ironically, it was NBC News reporters who exposed the New York Times/CBS News/60 Minutes’ October Surprise, which was purposely meant to hurt President Bush. Embedded with the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne, Second Brigade, they said the missing HMX and RDX explosives were already gone before U.S. troops entered Baghdad. According to the New York Sun, Charles Duelfer, chief American weapons inspector, said that in 1995, when he was on the U.N. inspections team in Iraq, he “urged the U.N.’s atomic watchdog to remove tons of explosives that have since been declared missing.”

KERRY, EDWARDS ALWAYS BLAME U.S. MILITARY FIRST

Nonetheless, ever skeptical of the Bush administration, no matter how many facts are presented to them, White House Press Corp hacks mercilessly pummeled Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita and Maj. Austin Pearson concerning what the elite media had hoped was a smoking gun. While Kerry and the elite media leveled charges of looting by Iraqi terrorists and accused U.S. troops of not securing the al-Qaqaa area, Pentagon officials said it would have taken 38 trucks and more than two weeks to haul the tagged munitions out of Iraq. In addition, their movement wouldn’t have gone unnoticed. But Vietnam draft-dodger John Edwards, on a recent propaganda tour in Indianola, Iowa, still accused Bush and our troops of “not looking hard enough for the weapons cache.”

What’s more, Maj. Pearson, who was the 24th Ordinance Company commander in Iraq, said he personally destroyed over 7,000 tons of explosives. But all the New York Times, CBS News and other media leftists can concentrate on is the “missing” 380 tons! They wanted to make it a campaign issue for Kerry, even though it’s already been discredited.

But hoping to capitalize on what now has no basis in fact, Kerry wasted no time running with the phony charges, recklessly slapping together another anti-Bush attack ad to further politicize the war in Iraq and our troops, which he daily undermines and puts in harm’s way through his treasonous rhetoric. When Kerry attacks Bush, he attacks our troops’ commander-in-chief and, in turn, attacks America and our allies. One of those allies is our strongest: New Iraqi president Iyad Allawi, of whom former Clintonite and current Kerry campaign advisor Joe Lockhart shamelessly called “a puppet” in which “you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips,” after Bush and Allawi addressed reporters on Sept. 27.

“The media should consider that it is they who sound like puppets – puppets of Moqtada el-Sadr and Abu Musab Zarqawi, who want America to think that Iraq is a hopeless sinkhole, and America would be wise to say uncle and withdraw,” said Brent Bozell, director of the Media Research Center (Sept. 28, 2004). “They [the leftist media] are the primary audience for the terrorists’ P.R. campaign of fear…The press might well discover the American people are not their puppets.”

That being said, it’s unconscionable that the very media elites who have been campaigning for John Kerry are the same ones putting the Pentagon on the defensive by forcing them to challenge another bogus story used to gin up Kerry’s partisan attacks on the war in Iraq. But the Pentagon ultimately exposed the lies of the elite media and Kerry, who are both bent on tearing down the U.S. to oust Bush from office. Once again, Kerry has betrayed our troops by conspiring with the Walter Cronkites, Dan Rathers and CNNs of the enemy-appeasing media, who, like Kerry, consistently undermine, second-guess and berate our troops without ever admitting to planting phony stories, which are likely written by Democrat operatives already residing in the press.

In Kerry’s perfidious affinity for always siding with U.S. enemies – especially murderous communist dictators, his willing accomplices in the elite media have assisted him in tactlessly blaming Bush and our troops for the “missing” explosives by propagating the Times-CBS News farce, reportedly leaked by the U.N. who wanted Kerry to win.

But this isn’t the first time Kerry has conspired with the Joseph Goebbels and the Michael Moores of the leftist media in a full-scale KGB operation to defeat a sitting Republican president. Unlike Bush, who’s consistently anchored by moral convictions and core values, Kerry’s political opportunism and expediency have caused him to shift wherever the political winds blow – especially if he thinks it will benefit him politically.

BAIT AND SWITCH: KERRY WANTED TO TAKE OUT HUSSEIN IN 1998

Based on Kerry’s sorry senatorial and military record, he has really only supported the politically correct and humanitarian foreign policies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. While Kerry initially supported the war in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 1998, 2001, 2002 and 2003, once the political winds shifted to the rising anti-American leftism of Howard Dean, Wesley Clark and Dennis Kucinich, so did he.

It wasn’t a coincidence that Mohamed ElBaradei, who heads the U.N.’s nuclear weapons control agency, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), that supposedly inspected the phantom caches of explosives before the Iraq war, was scheduled on Monday to give the forum of the U.N.’s General Assembly to present his annual report.

“For some time, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been seething over the Bush administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq – despite the fact that Saddam Hussein flouted U.N. resolutions for over a decade,” Newmax.com reported on Oct. 30. “Already, ElBaradei has butted into U.S. politics by having his spokesman speak twice this past week to CNN and the AP about the Al-Qaqaa explosives story.”

It’s become quite evident that the world’s most despotic leaders wanted John Kerry to win, which speaks volumes about who Kerry is as an imminent threat to our own national security.

The following are just some of the many examples of how the pro-Democrat media have literally become Kerry’s fig leaf: Hiding his treacherously anti-American record, while dressing him up as a so-called “war hero” who betrayed the U.S. time and time again:

Rewind to 1971. When Kerry returned early from Vietnam after being asked to leave, he was still fueled by anti-Americanism, as well as his eagerness to help our enemies. Kerry later made two illegal trips to Paris while still an enlisted Navy Lieutenant to give aid and comfort to Viet Cong communists who were still killing our troops. In fact, Newsmax.com columnist Geoff Metcalf (Nov. 1, 2004) said in the summer of 1970, Kerry reportedly met with Madame Binh, the Viet Cong’s chief negotiator in Paris “to push for [her]‘7-Point Peace Plan.”

Kerry later appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to present what would be his very first “October Surprise” to set his political career in motion. With the willing propagation of fellow pro-communists Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather (who both later called for a U.S. defeat in Vietnam), it was a treasonous attempt to bring down then-President Richard Nixon and crush the determination of the U.S. in a time of war.

After accusing our troops of war atrocities (that he also admitted to committing) by calling them “monsters,” who “raped,” “pillaged,” “cut off limbs” and “cut off heads” Kerry lied about witnessing on a daily basis, Kerry’s treason was later used as enemy propaganda to torture U.S. POWs imprisoned at the Hanoi Hilton. As a result, Kerry’s anti-Americanism not only prolonged the Vietnam War for two more years, it also resulted in increased U.S. casualties. To this day, Kerry has never once apologized.

KERRY STILL BRAZENLY ‘FLIPS OFF’ U.S. SOLDIERS IN TIME OF WAR

In fact, on Memorial Day, while Kerry was visiting the Vietnam Memorial Wall for another one of his many shameless photo-ops, Newsmax.com reported (May 31, 2004) that Ted Sampley, a former Green Beret who served two full tours in Vietnam, decided to confront Kerry.

“Senator, I am Ted Sampley, the head of Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, and I am here to escort you away from the Wall because you do not belong here,” Sampley told Kerry.

But after being summoned away by Kerry’s Secret Service agents, Sampley said Kerry “flashed the bird” at him in front of a group of young schoolchildren and coldheartedly walked away. Newsmax.com added that tens of thousands of Vietnam veterans had already registered their opposition to Kerry, who still brazenly “flips off” today’s U.S. soldiers, who are fighting for his “freedom” of speech that allows him to once again spit on them. Not surprisingly, a Google search of 257 stories mentioning Kerry’s Memorial Wall photo-op ignored Kerry’s bird flip at Sampley.

Because the Bush-hating media have wanted Kerry to win, they have illicitly tried to slander and silence the Swift Boats Vets and POWs for Truth, Vietnam Veterans for Truth, as well as anyone else confronting his false war crimes charges.

In fact, Kerry is so scared of Sinclair Broadcast Group’s film, “Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal,” that he’s even made Gestapo-style moves to stop the factual documentary, especially since the pro-Kerry media have refused to expose Kerry’s betrayal of hundreds of thousands of Vietnam veterans who rightfully oppose Kerry’s presidential bid. Some of these men are the most highly decorated Vietnam veterans in U.S. military history (which include two Congressional Medal of Honor winners).

“Very simply, the press has accepted everything John Kerry has said for the past 33 years,” said award-winning filmmaker Carlton Sherwood, a fellow Vietnam veteran who produced the Sinclair film and explained the elite media’s reluctance to air his film or offer the public a detailed account of its charges. “They have never challenged him. They never challenged him in ‘71. They are afraid to do so now because they might discover that over three decades, they were wrong about him and his war allegations.”

108 OF THE MOST PARTISAN DEMOCRATS SUPPORT KERRY’S TREASON

What’s more, aiding and abetting Kerry on his mission to hide the truth about his treason were some of the most politically divisive Democrats on the Hill. On Oct. 12, 108 Democrat senators and representatives jointly filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission to “advocate the censorship of media stories they don’t agree with,” according to Mark Hyman, Sinclair’s vice president of corporate communications. Ironically, most of these same partisan Democrats joyously embraced anti-American leftist Michael Moore’s anti-Bush hit piece “Fahrenheit 9/11” (which would be considered an illegal ‘527’ attack ad): Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Patty “Osama Mama” Murray and “Baghdad” Jim McDermott.

Angered by Sinclair’s film exposing Kerry’s betrayal of Vietnam POWs and their families, Democrats couldn’t afford to have Kerry’s Vietnam record magnified, so they’ve been helping Kerry try to censor the one film that has finally highlighted one of the biggest military scandals the pro-Democrat press has refused to investigate since Bill Clinton and Wesley Clark callously left 18 U.S. soldiers to be mutilated, burned and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, Somalia.

In addition, according to two newly released FBI documents, which the elite media have ignored, Kerry’s anti-American pet project, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, had already established deep connections to Viet Cong communists. Not surprisingly, in return, Kerry has been forever enshrined in the Vietnamese Communist War Crimes Museum for his “contributions” in helping them defeat the U.S. Kerry also picked up a presidential endorsement from the Communist Party of the United States.

Fast forward to 1979-1980. When 52 Americans were taken hostage and held for 444 days, then-Democrat president Jimmy Carter was exposed as the wimpiest, anti-American, enemy appeasing paper tiger in presidential history, surpassing even Bill Clinton – especially when the newly elected President Ronald Reagan got the American hostages released the very day he was sworn into office in January 1981. But where was John Kerry during those 444 days? National Review’s Steven Hayward has written the definitive book on Kerry’s political twin, Jimmy Carter, appropriately titled “The Real Jimmy Carter: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators, and Created the Party of Clinton and Kerry.”

In a July 26 interview with fellow National Review writer Kathryn Jean Lopez about his new book, Hayward describes how Kerry and “the Democratic Party [have] been fully Carterized.”

“Remember that he won the 1976 election in part because a lot of Democratic-party voters and independent voters thought he represented a return to the older Harry Truman-John F. Kennedy-Scoop Jackson-style Cold War liberal realism,” Hayward said. “Carter ran to the right of Ford on foreign policy, attacking Henry Kissinger and detente for example. Instead, what we got was, in Bob Dole's memorable phrase, “southern-fried McGovern.”

REAGAN DEMOCRAT ZELL MILLER AMONG FEW U.S.-LOVING DEMS

Hayward added that some Carter Democrats turned into Reagan Democrats, namely conservative Democrat Zell Miller, because of Carter’s emasculated foreign policies, which is why Hayward compared Kerry to Carter. For Kerry’s show of weakness in defending America, like Carter, he gets sympathetic “journalists” like Katie Couric, who wondered why conservatives always picked on Carter, one of her favorite ex-presidents.

“I know it really bugs you when people say what a great ex-president you have been,” Couric gushed as she defended Carter during an interview on his 80th birthday. “That does bug you, and it bugs Rosalynn as well, because you believe it's implicit in that comment that you weren't a great president.”

During a speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Carter gave us a glimpse of the nightmarish thought of what a Kerry presidency would look like.

In his speech, Carter, who willingly signed over the U.S. Panama Canal to corrupt Panamanian communist dictator Omar Torrijoson on Sept. 7, 1977, eerily displayed the same weakness he had in the late 70s towards confronting our enemies that gave us Bill Clinton’s lack of resolve with bin Laden and Hussein, as well as Kerry’s perennial “global test”:

“The United States has alienated its allies, dismayed its friends, and inadvertently gratified its enemies by proclaiming a confused and disturbing strategy of “preemptive” war,” Carter gutlessly claimed. “With our allies disunited, the world resenting us, and the Middle East ablaze, we need John Kerry to restore life to the global war against terrorism.”

Fast forward to 1984-85. When the elite media’s window-dressed “war hero” John Kerry and Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, a fellow U.S. traitor who lied about being on a one-year flying mission in Vietnam, flew down to Nicaragua to meet with Marxist-Leninist terrorist thug Daniel Ortega, they attempted to stop then-President Ronald Reagan’s valiant efforts to get much-needed finances to the country’s Freedom Fighters. (Harkin, a Marxist-Leninist himself, who claims to love democracy, is still trying to censor Rush Limbaugh on Armed Forces Radio.) But in the tradition of Neville Chamberlain’s “peace for our time” propaganda, Kerry returned to the U.S. to give his despotic-doting “give peace a chance” pitch in a bald-faced attempt to thwart Reagan’s Contra aid request.

KERRY, HARKIN AID, ABET MARXIST-LENINIST THUG DANIEL ORTEGA

According to Brookesnews.com’s Gerard Jackson (Aug. 23, 2004), Gary Porter and Peter Kornbluh, pro-Soviet members of the Washington-based, anti-American group, Institute of Policy Studies, set up shop to “derail Reagan’s policy of defeating the attempted Marxist-Leninist conquest of Central America.” To accomplish their goal, Porter and Kornbluh helped arrange Kerry and Harkin’s 1984 trip to Managua, “the result of which persuaded the Senate to vote against the Contras.”

Never missing a chance to invoke his extremely short, political stint in Vietnam in a news conference before Nicaraguan reporters, Kerry lied when he claimed that the U.S. didn’t want to “demilitarize” and accused Reagan of wanting to use military force as the only resort to international conflict. But Kerry and Harkin clearly wanted to aid and abet Marxist-Leninist terrorist Daniel Ortega, as Kerry first did with Viet Cong communists.

Upon returning to the U.S., Kerry spinelessly displayed once again his undeniable contempt for the U.S. and our military intervention on any level.

“It really hits home the same way as Vietnam,” Kerry arrogantly boasted. “Sending our own troops. I just don’t think Congress or the people will allow it. If we haven’t learned something by now about talking rather than fighting...”

But with great U.S. Republican presidents like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who weren’t afraid of facing down our enemies through military force, Kerry was proven once again to be on the wrong side of history.

“Reagan stuck to his policy of supporting the resistance to the Sandinista government,” WorldNetDaily.com editor Joseph Farah wrote (Feb. 17, 2004). “And the first time elections were held, the Sandinistas were swept out of office. Today, Nicaragua, a strong U.S. ally in the region, has troops fighting side by side with Americans in Iraq.”

But in return for his treason against the U.S., as well as his undying loyalty to the Sandinistas, Kerry earned the praise of such anti-American leftists as ABC News anchor Peter Jennings, who would later complain that “after years of trying to get rid of the Sandinistas, there is not much to show for their efforts (Dec. 24, 1990; Media Research Center).” Kerry would also get the presidential support of terrorist-friendly Sandinista thug, Tómas Borge, as well as Daniel Ortega’s idol, Cuba’s communist dictator Fidel Castro. (Maybe these are the phantom “foreign leaders” Kerry claimed were supporting him. According to Townhall.com’s Joel Mowbray, Kerry already lied about meeting with the “entire Security Council” in October 2002: “It’s fit a disturbing pattern: The Democratic candidate for president is a serial self-aggrandizer.”)

Fast forward to 1989. After John Kerry referred to the late great Ronald Reagan’s presidency as a time of “moral darkness” in a speech at the 1988 Democratic National Convention, who later called himself the “anti-Cold Warrior,” Kerry again proved his loyalty to communism by voting for a nuclear freeze before Reagan’s Cold War victory.

According to the Weekly Standard’s Duncan Currie (Sept. 27, 2004), Kerry’s entire 1988 campaign platform was among the most liberal of its day (sound familiar?).

“As his Boston Globe biographers write in John F. Kerry, “the main thrust of Kerry’s candidacy was an attack on Reagan’s economic, foreign, and military policies.” On the three big Cold War issues – the nuclear freeze, military spending, and support for the Nicaraguan contras – Kerry was pro-freeze, anti-defense buildup, and anti-contra aid.”

COMMIE-SYMPATHIZER DAN RATHER REWARDS KERRY’S TREASON

Even though Kerry was gravely disappointed that his pro-communist fantasies had collapsed, communist-sympathizing useful idiots like Dan Rather would later reward him and Harkin, who also longed for the Cold War days, by opining on his Dec. 19, 1992 broadcast that “the collapse of communism has left people hungry, cold and hopeless.”

Fast forward to 1991. Shortly before former President George H.W. Bush initiated Operation Desert Storm in the Persian Gulf, Kerry voted against entering Kuwait to take out Saddam Hussein, claiming that the U.S. was “not yet ready for what it will witness and bear if we go to war.” (Does this also sound familiar?)

Apparently, the Blame-America-First senator wasn’t finished admiring Hussein:

“In 1991, when in-the-know pundits warned of horrific losses, Kerry spoke against going into Kuwait,” wrote National Review columnist and military historian Victor Davis Hanson (Oct. 1, 2004). “When 100 hours brought unforeseen victory, he retroactively supported Desert Storm. Finally, he returned to his previous opposition when Kurds and Shiites were left hanging in the victory’s aftermath.”

Hanson added: “As was true over a decade ago during Gulf War I, [Kerry] contradicts himself when good news from the front makes his prior anti-war stance look either timid or foolhardy. But when the casualty rate rises or CNN is particularly vivid in airing the latest beheading or car bomb, he returns to his shrill pessimism and denounces the war.”

Fast forward to 1993-95. Shortly before U.S. troops entered the Balkans, CNN’s Late Edition host Frank Sesno asked Kerry if it would be more “acceptable” for U.S. soldiers to die under the U.N. flag than under the American flag.

“It depends what you mean by that, Frank,” Kerry hauntingly but not surprisingly replied (kind of like what “is, is” with Clinton). “If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no.”

President Bush recently replied to Kerry’s “global test,” which is one of the many reasons why Kerry is categorically unfit to command:

“Apparently my opponent believes that the oath of office is to the United Nations. On Jan. 20, 2001, I took an oath to the United States of America. I will repeat that oath to the United States of America on Jan. 20, 2005.”

KERRY’S JIMMY CARTER-STYLE, LIMP-WRISTED APPEASEMENT

While Bill Clinton was a paper tiger for cowardly fleeing Somalia and Iraq, Kerry’s “foreign policy,” like Carter’s, is even more apologetically limp-wristed towards our enemies than Clinton, if that’s possible, since Kerry had honed his enemy appeasing skills with the likes of Madame Binh and Daniel Ortega.

“Where the twin fiascoes of Somalia and Bosnia put to rest Mr. Clinton’s early infatuation with multilateralism, Mr. Kerry touts his faith in the process as evidence of genuinely heightened moral awareness,” said Lawrence Kaplan, senior editor of the New Republic. “And where the Clinton team emphasized the importance of “nation building,” Mr. Kerry has fallen back on the canard that every dollar spent abroad is a theft from those in need here at home.”

Fast forward to 1998. After 14 years of pursuing the case for taking out Saddam Hussein – prior to entering the presidential election, Kerry was suddenly showing signs, under Far Left pressure, of switching gears for political expediency. Kerry, to this day, has never been pressured by the partisan press to explain why he voted to slash nearly $7 billion in intelligence spending after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (when he also missed over 75 percent of the Senate intelligence meetings), or why he voted against every major weapons system currently used in the war on terrorism.

According to the Congressional Record (Oct. 10, 1998), in a speech to the 105th Congress, Second Session, Kerry actually made a definitive case for removing Saddam Hussein from power – that was until it went against anti-American leftist public opinion:

“Let’s understand very clearly that ever since the end of the war (in 1991), it has been the clear, declared, accepted, and implemented policy of the United States of America and its allies to prevent Saddam Hussein from building weapons of mass destruction…

“By February, the United States had an armada of forces positioned in the Gulf, and administration officials from our President on down had declared our intention to use military force if necessary to reduce Iraq’s capacity to manufacture, stockpile or reconstitute its weapons of mass destruction, or to threaten its neighbors.

“Mr. President, over the years, a consensus has developed within the international community that the production and use of weapons of mass destruction has to be halted. We and others worked hard to develop arms control regimes toward that end, but obviously Saddam Hussein’s goal is to do otherwise. Iraq and North Korea and others have made it clear that they are still trying, secretly and otherwise, to develop those weapons…

“Our allies need to understand that the ramifications of letting Saddam Hussein out of the box that we put him in with respect to inspections would be serious and far-reaching. So I believe we need to keep the pressure on them to stand firm, to stand firm with us, and unless we reassert our leadership and insist that Iraq allow those inspectors to do their job, we will have destroyed a number of years of our effort in ways, Mr. President, that we will regret in our policy for the long haul.

“I would point out also that there are experts on Iraq, those in the inspections team, those at the U.N. and elsewhere in our international community, who are very clear that Saddam Hussein’s first objective is not to lift the sanctions. His first objective is to keep Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program – that will come ahead of all else…

“The fact is, Mr. President, over these last months there has been precious little to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing that capacity without the inspectors there and without the unwavering determination of the United Nations to hold him accountable. So the question still stands, what is our policy and what are we prepared to do about it?”

PRO-KERRY MEDIA’S HATRED FOR BUSH TRUMPS EXPOSING KERRY

After 12 years and 17 U.N. resolutions, Bush masterfully has done the exact same thing Kerry wanted to do but now criticizes Bush for doing. One question: Where were the elite media and why aren’t they holding Kerry and other Democrats accountable? It’s because their hatred for Bush trumps telling the truth about Kerry.

Fast forward to 2001. In the battle of Tora Bora, al-Qaida and the Taliban were surrounded in the White Mountains along the border with Pakistan. After claiming that the U.S. allowed bin Laden to escape, Kerry groused: “We didn’t use American forces,” which was false, National Review’s Jed Babbin wrote.

In fact, we used the very weapons Kerry voted against – laser-guided bombs, AC-130 gunships and Predator drone planes. It was Kerry’s precious Clinton administration that allowed bin Laden to escape on at least three occasions. Now Kerry has since tried to shift the focus of the war on terrorism away from Iraq and make it exclusively about getting bin Laden, when Kerry started saying the same things six years prior.

Fast forward to 2004. When the phony story broke about the “missing” explosives that has now been debunked by NBC News journalists who were actually doing their jobs by reporting what happened in Iraq, instead of from in cushy Manhattan newspaper offices.

But Kerry couldn’t wait to get to the nearest studio to record the lie that the New York Times/CBS News/60 Minutes spread to the American public just days before the election.

“Now we know that our country and our troops are less safe because this president failed to do the basics,” Kerry hastily squawked. “This is one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration. The incredible incompetence of this president and his administration has put our troops at risk and put our country at greater risk than we ought to be. After being warned about the danger of major stockpiles of explosives in Iraq, this administration failed to guard those stockpiles – where nearly 377 tons (the number that the pro-Kerry New York Times cited) of highly explosive weapons were kept. The missing explosives could very likely be in the hands of terrorists and insurgents, who are actually attacking our forces now 80 times a day on average.”

KERRY, EDWARDS ARE THE REAL CEOs OF DISINFORMATION

Edwards recently called Vice President Dick Cheney “the chief officer of disinformation.” But judging by Kerry and Edwards’ asinine statements against Bush and this country in a time of war, both Kerry and Edwards have earned that title, as well as the media sycophants who cover for them. Like Carter and Clinton, Kerry now seeks to become the third Democrat president to commit further treason by spitting on the graves of our brave soldiers, as he still longs for our enemies’ stamp of approval.

In the end, the ultimate goal of the Bush-hating media was to instill more doubt about Bush as well as our military, who don’t deserve to be subjected to Kerry or Edwards’ anti-American malfeasance or their media allies’ anti-American journalistic malpractice.

Is it any wonder our military overwhelmingly supports President Bush and tells us time and time again how the elite media and the Kerry campaign distort the news about Iraq?

Speaking of which, upon word of the bin Laden tape, Kerry claimed that he alone had “the ability to make America safer,” but how can he claim that when he has a treasonously long track record of providing aid and comfort to our enemies? © 2004 Doug Schmitz. All Rights reserved.

Doug Schmitz, a conservative columnist who holds a master’s degree in journalism, is a regular contributor to Etherzone.com, MichNews.com and BushCountry.org. He’s also been a guest contributor for Accuracy in Media, a media watchdog group for the liberal media. © 2004 Doug Schmitz. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.