SuperScout
03-17-2004, 02:52 PM
Remembering what George (no, not Washington, Bush, or Carlin) Santayana said about the past, and how it frequently can return to chew upon certain posterior body parts, we have only to examine the past performance of the erstwhile Democrat presidential candidate to find a plausible windowpane into his present and future. First, he was in favor of the Vietnam war, all fired up and dangerous, cruising offshore in the safe blue waters of the South China Sea, only to get his feet wet and muddy later with frequent beachings of his canal craft. We are entertained or appalled, by his own admissions, of his reports of killing civilians, unarmed and wounded VC and other enormous threats to his safety of himself and his patiently waiting boatcrew.
Not content to bask in the glow of all his grateful crew members, rows of medals worthy of a real hero, and knowledge of having participated in helping a threatened people trying to become more secure, he heaves his medals across a fence in protest, mounts a stage replete with cameras and sound recorders, and declares to the world the horrors of war crimes he heard about. Not that he witnessed, not that he could verify, not that could be verified, but atrocities he knew were lies of the most heinous sort. He gratitiously and maliciously slandered the honorable service and sacrifice of thousands of Vietnam veterans. His sworn testimony was sucked up by the gullible and lazy press, and broadcast around the world. And it was his sworn testimony that was used to bring inordinate pain and suffering to our POW's in Hanoi. He lied then, he knew it was a lie, and he still lacks the physical and moral attributes to atone for his egregious lies.
Fast-forward to the 90's. He didn't support the initial efforts to remove the Iraqi forces from their illegal invasion and occupation of Kuwait, voting with a tiny minority of other isolationist liberals. A few years later, after several pompous statements about the evils of WMD in Saddam's hands and other reasons for regime change, he votes to allow the President to use military force to remove the cancer of Saddam from Iraq, then Kerry votes against the funds necessary to implement the changes he voted for. His frequent, and now predictable squeamishness on matters of national security can only spell uncertainty, doubt, confusion in our armed forces, those splendid warriors at the very gates separating us from evil. The issue of national security should be foremost on the Cogent Issues List of this campaign, and Kerry's track record of weakness, indecisiveness and vaccilation makes him patently unfit for high office.
Not content to bask in the glow of all his grateful crew members, rows of medals worthy of a real hero, and knowledge of having participated in helping a threatened people trying to become more secure, he heaves his medals across a fence in protest, mounts a stage replete with cameras and sound recorders, and declares to the world the horrors of war crimes he heard about. Not that he witnessed, not that he could verify, not that could be verified, but atrocities he knew were lies of the most heinous sort. He gratitiously and maliciously slandered the honorable service and sacrifice of thousands of Vietnam veterans. His sworn testimony was sucked up by the gullible and lazy press, and broadcast around the world. And it was his sworn testimony that was used to bring inordinate pain and suffering to our POW's in Hanoi. He lied then, he knew it was a lie, and he still lacks the physical and moral attributes to atone for his egregious lies.
Fast-forward to the 90's. He didn't support the initial efforts to remove the Iraqi forces from their illegal invasion and occupation of Kuwait, voting with a tiny minority of other isolationist liberals. A few years later, after several pompous statements about the evils of WMD in Saddam's hands and other reasons for regime change, he votes to allow the President to use military force to remove the cancer of Saddam from Iraq, then Kerry votes against the funds necessary to implement the changes he voted for. His frequent, and now predictable squeamishness on matters of national security can only spell uncertainty, doubt, confusion in our armed forces, those splendid warriors at the very gates separating us from evil. The issue of national security should be foremost on the Cogent Issues List of this campaign, and Kerry's track record of weakness, indecisiveness and vaccilation makes him patently unfit for high office.