The Kerry Crackup

The Weekly Standard ^ | September 4, 2004 | Stephen F. Hayes

[kennedy]

IN A WEEK dedicated to Republican speechifying about why John Kerry should not be the next president of the United States, the most persuasive words came from a Democrat. And I don't mean Zell Miller's invigorating speech on Wednesday.

I mean John Kerry's rant in Ohio, less than an hour after George W. Bush finished his acceptance speech in New York. It's a shame the networks didn't include Kerry's remarks in their GOP convention coverage. In just 30 minutes, Kerry provided a revealing look at himself, a reminder of his meandering views, several clues about the state of his campaign, and a hint of what the next two months will look like.

Kerry sought to portray himself as an aggrieved but righteous politician, the innocent target of vicious Republican attacks. This is a substantial rewriting of history. Kerry and his campaign staff have been every bit as biting in their criticism--having, prior to this, called Vice President Cheney unfit for office and accused President Bush of using family connections to avoid serving in Vietnam. But the gamble for Kerry is not that reporters will point out the many harsh attacks his campaign has leveled at the Bush administration. The media wouldn't be so inconsiderate. The risk for Kerry is that in a campaign devoted largely to convincing voters of his strength, assuming the mantle of victim does little to inspire confidence.

"For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander in chief," Kerry complained.

He later added: "Worst of all, George Bush misled America when he took us to war in Iraq."

That last line may have been the most significant one in the speech because it indicates that Kerry has veered sharply back to the Howard Dean/Al Gore/Michael Moore wing of the Democratic party. Kerry had largely abandoned the "Bush-lied" line of attack since admitting on August 9 that, in retrospect, he still would have voted to authorize the war in Iraq. That change of strategy prompted a pitched intra-party debate. Many congressional Democrats and party strategists pushed the Kerry campaign to trash Bush as dishonest. (It's worth remembering that 95 percent of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention opposed the war.) The Kerry campaign resisted. Their reluctance may have been born of Kerry's renewed endorsement of the war, his own history of supporting regime change, or perhaps even John Edwards's explicit rejection, last year, of the notion that Bush lied to get us into war.

"So did I get misled? No. I didn't get misled," Edwards said on Hardball with Chris Matthews on October 13, 2003. When Matthews asked Edwards directly if he got an "honest reading on the intelligence," the junior senator from North Carolina seemed to place much of the blame on the intelligence community. "I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee," he said. "So it wasn't just the Bush administration. I sat in meeting after meeting after meeting where we were told about the presence of weapons of mass destruction. There is clearly a disconnect between what we were told and what, in fact, we found there." Edwards's rhetoric was in some respects more alarmist than that of the Bush administration, describing the threat from Iraq as "imminent" and calling for the overthrow of Saddam long before Congress voted to authorize war.

The report from the Senate Intelligence Committee didn't help Kerry either. Whatever one thinks of the report in its entirety, its specific findings helped Bush politically by pouring cold water on the Bush-lied myth. It exposed Joe Wilson as a fraud, found that Iraq had actually increased its anti-U.S. terror planning in 2002, and provided a detailed account of how the intelligence community had reached its consensus that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Kerry's own history on Iraq also complicates his making the case that Bush lied. It's tempting, but we won't return here to the list of hawkish Kerry statements on the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. What we can say is this: From 1996 through the Iraq war last year, John Kerry regularly advocated the use of force, unilaterally if necessary, to remove the Iraqi dictator. He did so before the Bush administration even began to make its case for war. He was such a strong advocate of regime change throughout the late 1990s that Paul Wolfowitz once singled Kerry out by name as a Democrat who understood the Iraqi threat. Those days of consistency disappeared, however, with the election of George W. Bush.

And Kerry's speech last Friday was only the latest example. The content of the speech was reminiscent of Al Gore's recent vein-popping rants, although Kerry wasn't as wild-eyed in his delivery. "The truth is, when it comes to Iraq, it's not that I would have done one thing differently," he said. "I would've done almost everything differently."

Everything, that is, other than change his vote. John Kerry says he was misled into an unnecessary war. He also says he'd vote for it all over again.

Somewhere Karl Rove is smiling.

[arasina]

ooooh, I like that graphic, Linda! You do great work!

[Use It Or Lose It]

Carl Cameron just reported about Kerry's comments in Steubenville OH today, and among them were Lurch's words to the effect that "they want to make this campaign about something that happened 35 years ago." Huh?

Kerry sounds delusional now.

Uh, John Fraude Kerrie, the only word we heard from your lying mouth for six months was VIETNAM. You became a walking, talking joke. And now that the truth is finally coming out...you want to change the subject. You made it an issue. Grow up, learn how to deal with it, and stop whining.

[SunkenCiv]

The Kerry campaign reminds me of that story, by Edgar Allen Poe I think, "Into the Maelstrom"... except without the happy ending for the leading character. ;')

[SunkenCiv]

Clinton said something genuinely amusing today... asked about his heart condition / surgery, he said, "the Republicans are not the only ones wanting four more years." Heh... and it's inadvertently a slam on Kerry. :'D

George W. Bush will win reelection by a margin of at least ten per cent.

[SunkenCiv]

When (not IF) he loses this election just about all he has to point to as a reason is that appearance in Ohio. Pathetic isn't a strong enough word.

Not long ago here on FR, someone started a thread, something about wondering when Kerry would have his Howard Dean moment. I think this "midnight special" was it.

George W. Bush will win reelection by a margin of at least ten per cent.

[SunkenCiv]

Google search

[Redcloak]

I wonder if they will be serving grape Kool-aid at the Kerry-Edwards election night party.

[NYCVirago]

The primary media has YET to show objectivity, and yet, my impression is that the vast majority of the public acts as though the media is objective. How elese can one explain 40% of the public wanting a shell of a con-man to be the president?

Mondale and Dukakis both got over 40% of the vote. Heck, McGovern ran one of the worst campaigns ever, and he still got 37 percent of the vote! No matter how bad Kerry is, he's still to get at least 40% of the vote, simply because of RAT voters who will never vote for a Republican.

[TC Rider]

Bingo. This has been apparent ever since Kerry starting in with his "Mommy, make them stop!" whining. The media instead chose to portray that as "strength."

In other news (that will never happen):

The Bush administration has had legal counsel send letters to 60 Minutes and other media outlets threatening legal action if they conduct interviews with Kitty Kelly.

They have also contacted Amazon, B&N and other large book sellers advising them not to sell her new tell-all book because it is full of 'lies'.

The Bush administration has characterized Kelly as a liar since she was never in a car with George W. Bush while he was drinking.

[hershey]

That midnight rally....Kerry's frantic pacing, shuffling of 5x8 cards...God forbid he put on his glasses. 'Swaggering, staggering', yup. The hecklers in the background, and Kerry acting goosed, Edwards seen momentarily as Kerry staggers by...Edwards looking morose, wondering when Hill will arrive and save him. It was worth staying up for. Priceless.

[hershey]

Mark Steyn said some months ago that Kerry was 'botoxificated'. Also called him, 'Nuancyboy'. Looking closely at Kerry today...at his campaign stop in Ohio, it appears that his face is melting. I kid you not. Bags under the eyes have moved sideways, drooping...like a Peter Sellers/Inspector Clouseau disguise. You can't make this stuff up, guys.

[Chieftain]

One of the BIG reasons that Kerry has tanked in the polls is because of the Swiftees killer ads!

You can bet the DemocRAT 'smear the Swiftees' campaign will be kicked up to a whole new level now.

Support for the Swiftees is crucial right now, so they can get these ads on the air on REGULAR TV in battleground states.

FReepers are key in getting the word out about the righteousness of the SBVFT by exposing Kerry's FRAUD.

These Swiftee window stickers get the word out to the driving public, display public support for the SBVFT, as well as displaying the website address!

Swiftee window sticker thread - get yours! Freep mail for details

[onyx]

I think Carl Cameron deserves a Purple Heart a day,
for having to travel and file Lurch reports. I can
tell he can't stand Kerry.

[ride the whirlwind]

Thanks for the link.

[Doc On The Bay]

..."Both Sides of His Mouth...."

SOMETIMES, "REALITY" exceeds Fantasy!!

Doc

[PhilDragoo]

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

[The Citizen Soldier]

You're right on the button...

People vote against a candidate by not voting at all. VOTERS go to the polls to vote FOR a candidate.

[onyx]

Eerily hilarious.

[SunkenCiv]

The Demagogic Party is moving sloooowly toward the MOR... in '92/'96, they had a former military journalist on the ticket (VP Gore), and a slippery liar (Clinton) who supported Soviet policy by his method of protest. Kerry's methods of protest also supported Soviet policy, at the very least, but he served albiet briefly in Vietnam.

In 2008 I should think we'll see at least one Dim candidate who is / was a military man (or woman) who served in Afghanistan and / or Iraq (and/or Iran/Syria/N Korea).

George W. Bush will win reelection by a margin of at least ten per cent.

[SunkenCiv]

You're most welcome.