Well, there’s a shock. As I sit in Duffy’s watching the giants (lose), I read the paper, laughing and snorting, causing the other patrons to wonder at what. In a totally expected editorial, the Raleigh News and Observer has endorsed John Kerry for President. I am amazed that it took them so long. Or maybe not. It is a fluff piece of journalism, which takes the standard liberal line against President Bush: no WMD, tax cuts evil and only for the rich, not enough money for NCLB ( apparently, the massive amounts of money being spent now aren‘t enough). And not being a uniter. Did the Libs ever gave him a chance? Other then for about a week after 9/11.
Describing Kerry as:
John Kerry is a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, a former prosecutor, for 20 years in the Senate a hard-working lawmaker with an independent streak. (snicker)
is absurd. The man has 11 pieces of legislation and 4 resolutions in 20 years, none substantive. He has done less then nothing.
Kerry has blistered Bush convincingly on Iraq policy. The senator says it was flawed from the start, in that it proceeded from a mistaken assessment of the danger posed by Saddam, and that it was not planned well enough to avoid the inevitable difficulties of securing the peace.
The sometimes attentive Senator had been an active proponent of regime change since 1998, when he voted for the Iraq Liberation Act. And his many, many comments supporting regime change and protecting the human rights of the Iraqi’s. Also, you have to win the war before you worry about the peace. Did we have a plan for the peace prior to WWI and WWII? I think not.
He finds the president culpable for having alienated many countries that might normally have helped the U.S. effort. He says he would try to restore those bonds even now, so that the costs and responsibilities for the orderly rebuilding of Iraq could be shared, and he makes sense when he says he believes a new president would have a better chance of doing it.
Who is alienating countries? Has the N&O forgotten about Australia, Poland, Italy, GB, and Iraq, among the countries that Kerry has offended? Apparently they have. And do we really need France and Germany? Both countries have said “Non” to any involvement, militarily or economically,and France is implicated heavily, along with the UN, in the Oil For Food fiasco. Then there is Kerry’s “plan” to go it alone in talks with North Korea, blowing off the 5 other countries involved in the talks now. The N&O has bought the Kerry bloviation hook, line, and sinker.
Kerry is mindful of how thin U.S. military forces are stretched, and he advocates increasing the number of men and women in uniform. He has some firm ideas about reorganizing the deployment of American troops that would avoid instituting a draft, and he would accelerate the training of Iraqi citizens to secure their homeland. He inspires confidence with his vision for how this country should proceed in a dangerous world.
Really? His 40,000 troops plan was originally to add 20K MP’s, and 20K civil affairs people. Now he is saying Special Forces troops. But he has never said how. Sounds like a draft to me. Accelerate how? He inspires those who want to cut and run. Period.
I am sure the N&O worked overtime, something Kerry and Edwards have never done, to try and find some way to find something to say they support Kerry rationaly, as the other liberal MSM’s have. It just isn’t based in reality, nor does it show much understanding of the issues facing the country, and Kerry’s complete opposition to Defense, Intelligence, as well as his Socialist standings over his 20 years in the Senate.
The profile of a President is someone who gets things done. President Bush has. Kerry and Edwards are two do nothings, who would do nothing in the White House.
