Kerry Continues to Criticize Bush on War

NewsMax ^ | 4/9/2003 | Fr. Michael Reilly

[Hugenot]

NewsMax.com's religion editor Fr. Michael Reilly says that Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's decision to court the antiwar vote may turn out to be smart politics.

Campaigning in Iowa, Sen. John Kerry is accusing the Bush administration of jumping the gun in Iraq and missing an opportunity to resolve the nuclear standoff in North Korea.

"Had they really been interested in doing this differently, they could have not ratcheted up the troops to the level that they did as early as they did," the Massachusetts Democrat insists, according to the Boston Herald.

"They could have allowed France and others to exhaust their questions, they could've gone into the fall, [they] could've done a whole bunch of things, meanwhile [they] could've paid attention to North Korea, [and] probably have resolved that and then moved forward."

Conventional wisdom dictates that Kerry should tread lightly on the antiwar rhetoric, especially after the backlash over his claim that the U.S needed "regime change" as much as Iraq.

But the Bay State liberal is banking on the fact that almost all the opposition to the war is concentrated among Democratic primary voters - and the gamble seems to be paying off.

Sens. Joe Lieberman and John Edwards have each staked out a more moderate stance towards the war. And they're paying the price for their mainstream views as the party's peaceniks look elsewhere.

While Lieberman slips in the polls and Edwards finds himself heckled by antiwar demonstrators, Kerry has been courting the votes of the antiwar liberals who have the power to deliver the presidential nomination.

He understands that the nineteen months between now and Election Day 2004 is a political eternity.

By then, the war is likely to be a distant memory, just like the first Gulf War was for President Bush's father in 1992.

Remember "It's the economy, stupid?"

[lsee]

Somebody change the logo and let's start a new campaign for Kerry....

Kerry is so very...STUPID?

[justlurking]

But the Bay State liberal is banking on the fact that almost all the opposition to the war is concentrated among Democratic primary voters - and the gamble seems to be paying off.

So he gets the nomination, then gets routed by Bush in the general election when all his anti-war comments are replayed for the 87+% that support the war.

I guess his meaning of "success" is somewhat different than mine.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

>>"He's back and he more rabid than ever."

You'd better be careful, he might throw somebody else's medals at you!!!

[chachacha]

Hey John Kerry and the rest of you LIBERALs.

The folks in Iraq aren't jumping up and down because they cared about weapons of mass destruction.

They are jumping because of REGIME CHANGE

Now Mr Kerry and all you other liberal bottom feeders. Here are the questions you need to answer.

1. DO YOU AGREE AND WOULD YOU HAVE ASKED FOR A REGIME CHANGE HAD YOU BEEN PRESIDENT?

2. IF YOU AGREE WITH REGIME CHANGE HOW WOULD YOU HAVE REMOVED HIM?

[GiveEmDubya]

""I believe Kerry, Dean, and Kucinich are the current front-runners, and will continue to be.""

Good. I find them all far too liberal to get elected. Kucinich especially. Out of the 3, I would assume Kerry would win the nod.

""Edwards, Lieberman, and the other slightly moderates are toast.""

Edwards is toast, yes. Getting to be near toast in his own Senate seat too. Lieberman still has name recognition which will get him something, but not a prime time nomination acceptance speech.

"Sharpton is a sideshow."

Who I hope takes enough of the vote to get a speaking part at the Dem convention! That would be pure disaster for them, which is why I don't think it will happen, but we CAN hope.

As for Hillary, every poll I've seen would show her sliding to the Dem nomination--only to be summarily squashed by Bush. But there's a year and a half to go so we'll see.

[Zebra]

But the Bay State liberal is banking on the fact that almost all the opposition to the war is concentrated among Democratic primary voters - and the gamble seems to be paying off.

The problem for Democrats today is the tendency to run to the left to try to get the base out for the primaries. This is a doomed approach. Clinton--while a train wreck of a human being--was a shrewd politician. He understood that you did not need to cater to the fringe--the gays, greens, animal idiots, etc. (they were always going to come aboard, although the Nader factor is real now). He banked on looking centrist enough to make sure the Reagan Democrats stayed at home.

Kerry is tone deaf, politically, as his recent statements reveal. His is the arrogance of ego, unprotected from himself by Clinton-type managers (remember the bimbo-eruption personnel). Running on an anti-war platform will piss off patriotic labor and the middle. He is so toast. Edwards, Gephardt and Lieberman are the ones playing it smart, hoping to get a bounce from the center if Bush stumbles on the economy next year. Remember, second terms are all about the economy--these guys are laying in wait. Kerry, on the other hand, will be out by Iowa.

[aristeides]

You don't mention Gephardt. He has labor support, and his support of the war may end up helping him.

[Fifth Business]

Here's the fallacy to Kerry's argument:

According to the anti-sanctions experts, over 5,000 children under the age of 5 per month are killed as a result if the U.N. sanctions. Thus, waiting until the fall would have killed an additional 25,000+ children.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Kerry continues to sink further into the tarpits of wacko leftism.

At this rate, he won't even carry Massachuttsets.

[GiveEmDubya]

Heck, I've heard so little of the man lately I just plain forgot about him. I'd say he's as close to frontrunner status as the rest, but if he doesn't get labor out in force then he's done. Electability? I dunno, maybe. Time will tell.

[Hazzardgate]

Anyone know how labor is breaking, party-wise these days? (Bush Democrats?)

[whadizit]

He's an egomaniac and is the kind who will never admit he was wrong! I'm sure Baghdad Bob is still saying that, too!

[Savage Beast]

"they had 'sobered' up their reckless talk."

AmericanInTokyo put it more succinctly:

"The North Koreans are absolutely crapping in their trousers."

[Savage Beast]

To which I had to add:So are the Democrats.

[hope]

He must be eating too much blue ketchup!

[Vision Thing]

Let Kerry move further to the Left. It's exactly where we want him and the Dems to be.

[mondonico]

"Remember "It's the economy, stupid?""

Actually, it was Ross Perot, stupid.

[mondonico]

Er--that was addressed to Kerry, not to you.

[Ciexyz]

Mr. Kerry -- shuddup already!

[ladyinred]

They are admitting that this protest junk is all about politics aren't they? Gee, didn't think they'd give away the trade secrets to the unwashed! Of course, most of us already knew that. They are hoping history will repeat itself, so now the memo said to talk down the economy pronto!