Posted on 08/09/2004 11:14:28 AM PDT by madisonjr
Viet Nam is the exact opposite of Kerry's greatest strength. It is his greatest weakness. The more information that comes out, the more obvious it is that there is no better situation to indicate his disqualification as Commander in Chief.
So then why would they make it their #1 selling point? Simple...purely, 100% tactical. In reality, military competence, the most important criteria for president in the post-9/11 world, is demonstrably best exhibited by George Bush. As Commander in Chief, he presided over one of the most effective military actions in American history, the sequential elimination of the Taliban and Hussein. Kerry's greatest military achievement? The successful neutralization of a sampan full of rice. And it goes downhill from there. To the point where his superiors actually had to BEG him to leave.
Trying to remake Kerry’s military image, if successful, would simultaneously neutralize Bush’s greatest strength and remediate Kerry’s greatest weakness. Not unlike a plastic surgeon taking Bush’s relatively youthful, energetic face and transplanting it onto Kerry’s wrinkled, haggard old Botox bucket. Good trick if you can pull it off.
And Kerry’s team knows it can. Why? Because the most successful propagandist in history has already proven it.
Ask people “what was the most evil society in human history?” and most would say Nazi Germany. Then how could the German people ever get to the point where they not only accepted it, but were willing to die for it? The mastermind behind the process, none other than Hitler himself, explained it so simply, but we still don’t get it:
“By means of shrewd lies, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell -- and hell heaven. The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed.”
That’s all anyone needs to know to turn a coward into a hero. Of course that is only in public perception, not reality. Unfortunately, elections aren’t determined by the way things are...they are determined by the way people PERCEIVE them to be.
So if that’s the problem, what’s the solution? There is only one way to counter the “Big Lie” - and that is the “Big Truth”. For every time the liar says hell is heaven, we need to point out the heat of the fire, the smell of the brimstone, and that guy over there poking people with a pitchfork. And every time the liar says heaven is hell, we need to point out the music of the harp, the softness of the cloud and the smell of the flowers in the garden. To turn Hitler’s phrase, “by means of shrewd truth, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to remind people that heaven is HEAVEN, and hell is HELL...and a hero is a HERO...and a coward and a traitor is a COWARD AND A TRAITOR”.
Everyone who sends an email or posts to a forum or talks over the water cooler is wielding our only weapon, our only hope against our heaven (as America surely is compared to other countries) turning into hell (which our country surely will be under a coward like Kerry). Over-reacting? Apparently TaRAYzaa doesn’t think so. Remember, she said it would be four more years of hell under Bush. Do you agree? Then it’s time for another dose of the Big Truth.
Well, this is already longer than I intended, but I’ll close with some other Hitlerisms I found during my research. They speak for themselves. For the love of all that’s good, folks...keep up the fight.
“I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few”
“What luck for the rulers that men do not think”
(and this one, especially for this election)
“The victor will never be asked if he told the truth”
—Adolph Hitler
Fortunately, for our side, sKerry has made a big mistake making VN his #1 theme. His effort is already so full of hole, his swiftboat has sunk. And he's not wearing a lifejacket.
BUMP
The media should award itself a medal for trying to fish Kerry out of the murky swamp he into which he jumped.
George McClellan was a West Point graduate, a decorated veteran of the Mexican War and a very polished, well-connected gentleman who spoke (or at least read) French.
Abraham Lincoln had no military education, served briefly as a militiaman during the Blackhawk War and saw no combat. He was seen by most as a bumpkin with little polish or diplomatic skill. His own Secretary of State thought he was an idiot, and although he is considered a great public speaker today, his audience at the time was generally unimpressed.
Yet, in a moment when the fate of the nation hung in the balance, McClellan was indecisive and overcautious to a point approaching disaster.
Lincoln, despite his lack of battlefield experience, stuck to his guns and his plan and saw the Union through to victory.
Bush has shown that he can be a good CinC.
It's been interesting to watch them go from blowing smoke to eating crow. And we've only just begun!
Taxman Bravo Zulu for you most excellent op-ed!
Why would any sane person think that a twenty-something USN Ltjg. would have gained, in four short months driving a Swift boat, the kind of insight and maturity that would qualify him for President some 35 years later?
Maybe if he had stuck it out for his full year in 'Nam, spent at least 20 honorable years as a Naval Officer and retired, THEN been elected to the Senate and (even) DONE SOMETHING THRE!, an "I fought in Vietnam" scenario would play out favorably.
Instead, this despicable, disrespectful, dishonest, disgraceful, disgusting, dishonorable and thoroughly pitiful excuse for a "man," has the gall to think he can be President of the United States based entirely on his own projections of his (manifestly not!) "heroic" actions in Vietnam 35 years ago!
That miserable sonofabitch was not qualified then, and is not qualified now to pour pi$$ of of a Navy Chief's boondocker!
If enough people buy into his and the LIEberal's lies, however, we may have to endure four years (or until he gets impeached!) of a Presidency several orders of magnitude worse than Bill Clinton's first four years.
God help us if the Lying LIEberals prevail!
Ah, a member of the DU contingent. See ya later, troll.
9/11 was going to happen regardless of who was president. Anyone with even one braincell knows that. Anyone with more than one braincell also realizes the Islamic fundamentalists will not stop until America is under Shia law, which means all women forced to wear burkas, be killed if they get ANY sort of education, and blame the woman if she is raped.
But no, you and your liberalism cannot comprehend this. 'Can't we all just get along?' is your mantra. Guess what, they DON'T want to get along, will NEVER want to get along, and will repress every civil right you might even think you have currently because they WON'T get along.
Can't this penetrate you and your liberal buddies' heads? This is World War III. Your life depends on this outcome, that freedom wins...but with your buddy John 'Hamster' Kerry in charge, 4 million people will die before he's gets a clue, and how many more will die before you get a clue?
Surely you jest? Would you like a serving of crow before or after the election?
Dear Delusional...er...I mean fimby1:
Wow...I thought maybe somebody would eventually post a moronic response, but less than 30 minutes...congratulations. Oh, well...just gives me a chance to demonstrate the concept of The Big Truth in action.
No one with a functioning cranium could suggest that 911 was Bush's fault. The first point to make is that it was the TERRORISTS' fault. Typical liberal...blame everybody but the criminal.
Of those in our government who could have done things to minimize the chances of 911 happening, the 911 Commission concluded that several administrations and Congress itself could have done more, but that 911 probably could not have been prevented. I know that doesn't contribute to your political agenda, but it's reality. Live with it.
Of those in government, objectively people like Kerry, Kennedy, et al, who consistently voted to reduce funding for international intelligence and increase restrictions on their activities, certainly did more to increase the chances of a 911 than Bush ever did or could.
As to your last comment, I didn't say it was "the most effective", I said it was "one of the most effective", and any military analyst would agree. All you are doing is speaking from the delusion that you are the Commander in Chief instead of Bush. His goal was the removal of Hussein from power, which was accomplished at the time the banner was flown that said "Mission Accomplished". We didn't elect you, we elected Bush. You don't decide when the mission ends, he does. Once again, get over it.
Are we still there? Yes, so that we don't lose the gains we made and cause the sacrifices of our brave soldiers to have been in vain. Given the nature of radical Islamic terrorists (yes, it's their fault, not ours), we will always have to have troops stationed somewhere in the world to oppose their efforts, until they are eliminated. If that takes 1000 years, it will be worth it, because the alternative of thousands (or more) of innnocent Americans dying in terrorist attacks on our soil is not an option.
Mindless political propagandists like yourself only reinforce why it is so important that Kerry be defeated. The scariest part of your response is that you probably actually believe your propaganda. Well, my freedom is not going to be threatened by your stupidity, so once again the Big Truth had to vanquish the Big Lie.
Thanks for the exercise.
Actually, getting his ass publicly kicked by the American people on November 2, 2004 will, metaphorically, be the same thing.
A bit late, but the same outcome, metaphorically.
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.