"I'm there!"
Posted on 08/02/2004 8:00:01 AM PDT by Nasty McPhilthy
You could call it a vast left-wing conspiracy.
Thousands of rabidly liberal Democratic activists met in Boston this week to nominate the most liberal United States senator as their presidential candidate and the fourth most liberal senator as their vice presidential candidate. But the event was carefully orchestrated to present these candidates as moderate--or even conservative--on matters of culture and national security.
If anything, the Democratic National Convention demonstrated that leading Democrats have a deep and abiding faith in at least one thing: the willingness of the liberal media to ignore Democratic duplicity.
True Values
Deep in section 15 last Sunday, the New York Times printed the results of a poll it had conducted surveying more than 1,000 of the Democratic delegates. It revealed a group hailing from the hard left: 44% favored same-sex marriage (while another 43% favored civil unions), 62% said imposing environmental regulations is more important than preserving jobs, 66% opposed the death penalty for murderers, 75% favored abortion on demand, 77% said they are more concerned that anti-terrorism laws will violate civil liberties than they are that the laws won't do enough to stop terrorists, 78% said government should not favor traditional values over any other type of values, and 89% said all or most of the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire.
These views echo the true values (and for the most part the voting record) of the Kerry-Edwards ticket. But they are radically at odds with the Kerry-Edwards political strategy.
To win, John Kerry needs to hold every state Al Gore won in 2000, and pick up one or two more. That almost certainly means he must win somewhere in the South, and cannot lose any Midwest state Gore won narrowly four years ago (Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin) or any of the states that Gore won in 2000 where President Bush is competitive today (Michigan, Pennsylvania).
Yet the Democrats correctly believe that swing voters in these states are conservative on cultural and national security issues. So, they have given us a great masquerade in Massachusetts, where two men who have spent their political careers advancing the liberal line on both the culture and national defense put on the masks of moderates.
The poll-tested convention speeches of Kerry and Edwards were pushed through the same baloney grinder.
"[W]e will strengthen and modernize our military," said Edwards.
"We hear a lot of talk about values," said Edwards. "Where I come from, you don't judge somebody's values based upon how they use that word in a political ad. You judge their values based upon what they've spent their life doing. . . . John [Kerry] is a man who knows the difference between right and wrong."
"I will build a stronger American military," said Kerry in carefully chosen excerpts from his speech released in advance by his campaign.
"For four years, we've heard a lot about values," he said. But "[v]alues are not just words. They're what we live by. . . . And it is time for those who talk about family values to start valuing families."
So it will be from now to November: Two of the most liberal members of the liberal party, masquerading as hawks on defense and family values, pursuing the White House with lies.
Terence Jeffrey is Editor of HUMAN EVENTS.
"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and 1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our Commander-in-Chief?" -- Steven Gardner
"I'm there!"
With the election as close as we’re being told it is, it’s not too likely that Jennings or Brokaw will ask the question of Kerry.
Can you give us a link to that truly revealing and impressive non-endorsement?
It was a previous Freerepublic string. Here is the identification:
Vietnam Vets Opinions of Kerry
e-mail | 2004 Aug 2
Posted on 08/02/2004 7:15:55 AM PDT by armyboy
A constructive criticism. Let me be the first of many who will quibble at the "grant" part. The Constitution enumerates certain God-given rights that already exist, as seen by our Founding Fathers.
Yeah, a small thing, but these days words take on more of a meaning because of all the "nuances" that come into play when the libs try to gut that document.
One point I would like to make. Frenchy is basically applying for a job here. When you look at ones resume you concentrate on the last ten or so years, not what they did 20, 30 years ago. The dems are not talking about he legislative voting record. What are they afraid of. I think they do not want the Joe Lunchbuckets out there to know just how far to the left he really is.
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.