Posted on 01/30/2004 8:59:15 AM PST by jmstein7
The Character Issue: It Didn’t Hurt Clinton, But It Will Hurt Kerry
By Jonathan M. Stein
Bill Clinton and John Kerry have something in common: they are both liars. Bill Clinton’s lies were extrinsic to his ability to perform in office – i.e. he lied about receiving oral sex from an intern. John Kerry’s lies, distortions, and betrayals, on the other hand, go directly to his fitness, or lack thereof, to sit in the Oval Office. For that reason, American’s will not give Kerry the same “pass” that they gave Clinton on the character issue.
Public opinion polls indicate that President Bush’s strongest suit is his good character. In a recent Los Angeles Times survey, respondents stated that, regardless of his policies, they support the president because he “stands up for what he believes in,” they “know where he is coming from,” and, essentially, they “just like him.” Therefore, it follows a priori that a democrat who hopes to challenge Bush cannot merely run on policy differences – an effective candidate must be of equal or greater character. John Kerry is not that candidate.
The war on terror will unquestionably be a major theme in the 2004 Presidential Campaign. As in the days of the Cold War, the American public wants a leader who can ensure their continuing safety and protect their way of life from external malefactors. This is a critical area where John Kerry suffers from a severe credibility gap fostered by a long history of inconsistencies. Back in 1991, The New Republic caught John Kerry trying to play both sides of the Gulf War issue. Two letters were sent to Kerry’s office – one in opposition to the war, and one in favor of the war. Kerry’s response to the first letter read:
"Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."
However, Kerry’s response to the second letter read:
"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."
The article was aptly titled "Same Senator, Same Constituent.”
Clearly, Kerry hopes to counterbalance his perceived dithering on critical defense issues with his service in Vietnam. To mute criticisms of his ability to lead the nation in the war on terror, Kerry constantly, and ostentatiously, touts himself as a Vietnam “War Hero.” His claims are nothing short of outrageous. At best, Kerry is a mere deserter; at worst, John Kerry is a war criminal.
John Kerry, commanding Swift Boat 44 in Vietnam, recklessly slaughtered innocent women, children, and the elderly in cold blood. These facts are undisputed – facts that John Kerry himself said he’ll “never forget.” In 1971, John Kerry went before Congress and betrayed his fellow servicemen. Kerry testified that American soldiers in Vietnam committed atrocities similar to the atrocities that he admits to having committed – and he called his comrades war criminals. Thus, by Kerry’s own definition, John Kerry himself is not a war hero – he is a war criminal.
Kerry did not complete his tour of duty in Vietnam. Instead, in an appeal to Commodore Charles F. Horne, Kerry abused a loophole in the rules to secure an early discharge – Kerry suffered three minor, superficial wounds. American’s will not trust Kerry to stay the course in Iraq when they learn that he himself opted to cut and run.
Finally, as Senator in 1993, John Kerry betrayed and defamed the families of fellow servicemen who were MIA. Despite strong evidence to the contrary, which Kerry was able to suppress as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA, the Committee’s final report concluded that “there is no proof that U.S. POWs survived.” Kerry then turned viciously on the MIA/POW families and activists, slandering them as “professional malcontents, conspiracy mongers, con artists, and dime-store Rambos.” As a result, relations with Vietnam were normalized, and Colliers International, a firm in Senator Kerry’s Massachusetts, secured a contract with Vietnam worth billions.
John Kerry cannot be trusted, and he must never sit in the Oval Office.
Clinton slid during Impeachment because most of the electorate hated his persecutors more than they hated him, and the same will hold true in spades for Kerry if the Republicans are stupid enough to travel down that road.
Fewer things are more repugnant than the rantings of the smooth-palmed deferrment crowd. The only people that can take him on concerning his post war issues are other Vets, and even they would have to raise such a rukus (sp?) about it in order to bring it to the widespread attention of the electorate.
It's not usually the style of men of such grand caliber as our Vets to do such a thing. I'm sure most of them will just view it as a matter of it being up to the electorate to do some research before they vote.
It's not usually my tendency to look to the pessimistic side of things, but these last few weeks I'm hating nearly all politicians, all of the time.
No wonder Disraeli chronicled such disgust as I'm feeling as the phenomenon of Statesmen being degraded into Politicans.
They can all go take a long walk of a short pier; SOBs to the last creep and cretin.
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.