Thursday, August 12, 2004

Kerry sinking like a stone tied to a steel mannequin with cement shoes.......

.......As I've stated previously, I don't have to make a final decision on who I'm voting for until election day, but jeeeebus is Kerry making things a whole lot easier.

Let's start off with the primary problem I have with Kerry right now, mainly the War on Terror. Kerry has to energize his base to win the election so that they can convince the swing voters that Bush needs to go. He has the anti-war liberal democrat vote, but they need to convince the undecideds why Kerry would be better as president.

So Bush decides to call out Kerry on the War in Iraq and gets his final answer. Kerry did vote to give Bush the power to go to War in Iraq, but then did all he could to appeal to the anti-war base which he needs to get elected. For instance, before the primaries were in full swing Kerry appealed to the anti-war base-

MSNBC’S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Are you one of the anti-war candidates?" (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 1/6/04)

KERRY: "I am - Yeah." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 1/6/04)

For a complete breakdown of Kerry's statements on the war, I suggest this short documentary here, which pretty much sinks any credibility Kerry had in Iraq.

Now he's realized that those swing voters who were pro-Iraq war are not amused by his weasel-like political motivations.

So he responds to Bush thusly-

GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found.

Taking up a challenge from President Bush the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively."

How he maintains the anti-war vote with this statement is a puzzler, that's for sure. And during his big spotlight at the Convention he listed ZERO specifics as to a.)How he would have "used that authority effectively" and b.)what was so ineffective about Bush's plan. Not to say Bush's post war plan is going so well, but Kerry has done nothing to show me what, if anything, he would have done differently besides not funding the War. Signing up France and Germany doesn't count. The UN can't even protect themselves, so that doesn't really count either.

Kerry would need to reveal a master anti-terror plan equivalent to solving cold fusion to convince me that he would be a better president in this time of war than Bush.

Since Kerry has been running his campaign based on the "I served in Vietnam so I would make a better president right now" slogan, one would expect the Republicans to inspect his war record, much the way the Democrats have inspected Bush.

If I were Kerry, I wouldn't have run the campaign this way. I may not have the credentials to challenge his Vietnam records, but these guys certainly do. From what they have to say, I would not be all to vocal about my Vietnam credibility in order to convince voters why I would be a better president. Of course the Democrats are doing all they can to discredit the anti-Kerry Veterans, but so far they are failing miserably. From the Purple heart Medal to the story about his Apocalypse Now rendition in Cambodia, Kerry has played fast and loose with the truth. A certain Democratic consultant has gone so far as to suggest Kerry sue the Swift Boat veterans for Libel. A texas lawyer William J. Dyer, of the balder Blog, does not think this would be such a fabulous idea. Not only that, the veterans would probably welcome a chance to have Kerry take the stand, because by the accounts I can see, they would absolutely crush him.

This essay sums up the problems for kerry in a nutshell in regards to his Vietnam service-

"What both sides agree upon is two things: First, we wish for a higher level of discourse. The Swiftees have exerted themselves to act legally and responsibly, with sworn evidence. The Kerry partisans have responded with invective. Second, John Kerry has centerpieced his short Vietnam service as a junior officer 35-years ago as his major qualification to lead the US and the world in these dangerous times. The Kerry campaign has avoided discussing his 20-years in the Senate. The SwiftBoat veterans discuss Kerry’s central campaign claim. Now, it’s up to the press to be fair, and the American people to use the several months until election day to decide the issues."

For Kerry to avoid becoming another Dukkakis, I suggest he pull out a different approach to his campaign, and give up the "I served in Vietnam" stuff.

That's not gonna happen.

Sorry democrats, I think we're looking at another FOUR MORE YEARS. Which, considering the fact that we are still at war, looks to be the best option for our country and the world (minus the Islamofascists and other assorted dictators) at this time.

No comments: