I’m afraid of the dark.
Bill Keller
Editor, Conservative Outlook
I am afraid of the dark. I honestly can not remember a time in my life when I have not been somewhere between “terrified” and “nervous” when caught in darkness.
As a child, there were night lights, a room next to my mom, flashlights to go outside with and general avoidance of roaming beyond where light was plentiful.
That said, I still ventured out in the dark. I found ways to suck up my fear, set it aside and get on with things. Age tempered my fears, but never to the point where I felt any level of real peace with darkness. And, this continues today as well.
My most fearful time was that spent in Vietnam. Pulling guard duty on the perimeter, hunkered down in a fighting hole on patrol or traveling on the road at night (a very rare occurrence), fear could be palpable. You could taste it, smell it and feel it. And, yet, you could not allow it to interfere with your job because the price of shoddiness could be the life of your friend.
Those days are over 30 years in the past. Yet, walking in the woods still raises the hair on the back of my neck. And still, I walk in the woods and set my fear aside. A few weeks ago I was on a campout with our scout troop (http://troop47.com). Before crawling under my tarp for the night, I made the pilgrimage to the outhouse for a final pit stop. One of the younger scouts asked to go along as some called after him “Are you afraid of the dark?” “No!” the scout answered grumpily, but – he was. We chatted a bit and I told him I knew how he felt but that if he only moved his feet, all would be well.
Last March, as I was returning home from a Scout meeting about 9PM in the evening, something flashed across the road coming from behind our house. In stunned disbelief I realized it was a mountain lion. Honestly, my walks outside our home at night have taken on an extra edge since that night. And, yet, I walk out of the house at night.
There have always been dangers associated with darkness, both real and imagined. It is how an individual deals with these dangers that either allows a person to move forward or become incapacitated and ineffective. The choice is dependent on the individual and the final result always a reflection of that individual’s fears and strengths.
As a nation, we are standing in “darkness”. It is represented by the direct threat to our nation by the enemies of civilization. I have loosely bundled them into a group that I have defined as Islamofacists. They are determined, aggressive and lethal with the intent of destroying as much of the civilized world as possible.
They are continually trying to leverage their total disregard for the natural laws of civilization into an edge that allows them to attack anytime, anywhere, with any and all weapons available to them, including nuclear, chemical or biological agents.
The danger is real. The dead of 9/11 and those of the preceding 30 years represent an evolution of this threat. It is a threat that will, eventually, once again manifest itself within our borders. One has only to look at Israel and their struggle with terrorists to glimpse our future. The real question for America, prior to our election on November 2nd, is how we, as a nation, will handle this “fear of the dark”.
I believe this undercurrent of fear is a major element in the stark divide between our two major parties this year. Both sides fear attack. Both sides fear death. Both sides know in their heart of hearts that there will be more attacks within our borders. Both sides know that every effort is being made to make sure that rather than 3,000 dead there will be 30,000 or 300,000 or 3,000,000. The weaponry exists and is available and the fear is that it is inevitable.
The strongly divided camps between Kerry and Bush are directly related to how each group responds to “the dark”.
The Kerry group responds primarily by denying that the dark exists. “Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time!” The terrorists do not exist. If we stop interfering with their lives, they will leave us alone. If we only try to understand them, they will stop killing us.
The Bush group responds by acknowledging the dark, setting aside their fears and pursuing our attackers with every resource available to us. If we pursue them aggressively, if we incarcerate and kill these animals, it may not take us entirely out of the darkness, but it will provide us the best possible chance of reducing casualties long-term and offer the hope of peace in the future.
The vote being cast on November 2nd is simply that, a choice between succumbing to darkness or refusing to allow darkness to overpower us.
It is a stark choice.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Monday, October 18, 2004
Spend Three Minutes
Spend Three Minutes
Bill Keller
Editor: Conservative Outlook
In what may prove to be the most infamous “call out” in presidential politics, John Edwards invited the nation to “spend three minutes” with the men that served with John Kerry to find out what kind of leader he was and would be if elected.
In hindsight, the Kerry campaign must be shaking its collective head that it even brought up the notion of evaluating John Kerry’s war record. The Swifties have left his boat riddled with holes and drifting in some long lost river in Cambodia through their use of less that 5 minutes of television ads to date describing his military record through the eyes of those that did serve with him (and please, if a boat is in the water with John Kerry’s boat less than 50 yards away, they are serving together).
My own personal evaluation of his military record has been somewhat more confined. He can have all the purple hearts and bronze and silver stars. If the navy did not care enough to place proper value on their issue, I am not going to hammer on John Kerry for figuring out a way to get them awarded. It was a sloppy time for medals and there was a great deal of reliance on personal honor when looking at the submitted paper work, especially the honor of a military officer.
What I evaluate is his leaving early, 8 months early. Yes, I know, three purple hearts and you go home. He was the only one – THE ONLY ONE – during the Swift Boat’s Vietnam history to use that route home. I can’t think of any of us that did not want to go back to “the world” early. But I can not remember anyone who left early because of “boo-boos” on the arm and butt. I can say that for me, personally, returning home was very difficult. The thought of leaving friends behind still plays on me when my mind drifts back to Vietnam. Could I have made a difference if I stayed? The years have closed the door on making a different decision, but the window is still open to the thoughts of other choices.
Based on this event, I know I do not trust him to command the many Scouts from our Boy Scout Troop that have, and are joining the US military. Not to mention my own son. John Kerry does not have the personal courage to lead the United States in today’s dangerous world.
(That took the first minute and a half; let’s use the remaining minute and a half to evaluate his ENTIRE TWENTY YEAR SENATE CAREER.).
You would think from listening to Senator Kerry that he has been a relentless fighter for the people of America.
We hear concerns of taxation on the middle class – so I would expect to see some legislation concerning tax reduction targeting the middle and lower income wage earners.
We hear concerns of the rising deficit – I would expect to see some legislation rolling back government spending.
We hear concerns of the rising cost of health care – I would expect to see some legislation regarding tort reform, legislation providing incentives for drug companies to lower the cost of medicine, legislation providing incentives for insurance companies to lower the cost to subscribers, legislation providing expanded health care for the uninsured and the poor.
We hear concerns about the continued destruction of the environment – I would expect to see some legislation regarding the protection and clean up of the problems we have.
We hear concerns about the dependence on foreign oil and the need for a comprehensive energy plan – I would expect to see some legislation proposing the expansion of alternative fuels and oil exploration.
We hear concerns for our physical security – I would expect to see some legislation that would address border security, transportation security, the proliferation of Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons.
We hear concerns about the education of our children – I would expect to see some legislation concerning improving the quality of teaching, the teaching environment and performance expectations.
We hear concerns of our military weakness regarding troop size – I would expect to see some legislation concerning the expansion of our military manning requirements.
Yes, John Kerry has deep and vital concerns regarding the well being of our union. Lets take 1 and a half minutes and review his ENTIRE SENATE CAREER.
Five Bills that have his name:
• S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)
• S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)
• S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming “to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations.” (1994)
• S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects “to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America’s coastal resources.” (1991)
• S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)
Two Bills that were altered and finally passed
• H.R.1900 (S.300): Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)
• H.R.1860 (S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)
Four Joint Resolutions
• S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 – Oct. 28, 1989 “World Population Awareness Week.” (1989)
• S.J.Res.160: To renew “World Population Awareness Week” for 1991. (1991)
• S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 “Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day.” (1992)
• S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992 “National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992)
Please see Factcheck.org for the complete listing of this legislation.
Two bills, H.R..1860 and S.791 did deal with an apparent concern for the “rich”, providing them more government money for research and grants women owned business grants. That’s it. These are the only bills of John Kerry. These are what must address the many ills John Kerry is claiming is affecting our country the must be fixed and that he will fix when elected President. A total of 11 pieces of legislation in 20 years that can be easily reviewed in 1 and a half minutes.
So, spend three minutes to evaluate warrior and elected official John Kerry. His lack of competence, courage and vision is staggering. By almost any measure, this man is not fit to lead America is this most perilous time.
Bill Keller
Editor: Conservative Outlook
In what may prove to be the most infamous “call out” in presidential politics, John Edwards invited the nation to “spend three minutes” with the men that served with John Kerry to find out what kind of leader he was and would be if elected.
In hindsight, the Kerry campaign must be shaking its collective head that it even brought up the notion of evaluating John Kerry’s war record. The Swifties have left his boat riddled with holes and drifting in some long lost river in Cambodia through their use of less that 5 minutes of television ads to date describing his military record through the eyes of those that did serve with him (and please, if a boat is in the water with John Kerry’s boat less than 50 yards away, they are serving together).
My own personal evaluation of his military record has been somewhat more confined. He can have all the purple hearts and bronze and silver stars. If the navy did not care enough to place proper value on their issue, I am not going to hammer on John Kerry for figuring out a way to get them awarded. It was a sloppy time for medals and there was a great deal of reliance on personal honor when looking at the submitted paper work, especially the honor of a military officer.
What I evaluate is his leaving early, 8 months early. Yes, I know, three purple hearts and you go home. He was the only one – THE ONLY ONE – during the Swift Boat’s Vietnam history to use that route home. I can’t think of any of us that did not want to go back to “the world” early. But I can not remember anyone who left early because of “boo-boos” on the arm and butt. I can say that for me, personally, returning home was very difficult. The thought of leaving friends behind still plays on me when my mind drifts back to Vietnam. Could I have made a difference if I stayed? The years have closed the door on making a different decision, but the window is still open to the thoughts of other choices.
Based on this event, I know I do not trust him to command the many Scouts from our Boy Scout Troop that have, and are joining the US military. Not to mention my own son. John Kerry does not have the personal courage to lead the United States in today’s dangerous world.
(That took the first minute and a half; let’s use the remaining minute and a half to evaluate his ENTIRE TWENTY YEAR SENATE CAREER.).
You would think from listening to Senator Kerry that he has been a relentless fighter for the people of America.
We hear concerns of taxation on the middle class – so I would expect to see some legislation concerning tax reduction targeting the middle and lower income wage earners.
We hear concerns of the rising deficit – I would expect to see some legislation rolling back government spending.
We hear concerns of the rising cost of health care – I would expect to see some legislation regarding tort reform, legislation providing incentives for drug companies to lower the cost of medicine, legislation providing incentives for insurance companies to lower the cost to subscribers, legislation providing expanded health care for the uninsured and the poor.
We hear concerns about the continued destruction of the environment – I would expect to see some legislation regarding the protection and clean up of the problems we have.
We hear concerns about the dependence on foreign oil and the need for a comprehensive energy plan – I would expect to see some legislation proposing the expansion of alternative fuels and oil exploration.
We hear concerns for our physical security – I would expect to see some legislation that would address border security, transportation security, the proliferation of Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons.
We hear concerns about the education of our children – I would expect to see some legislation concerning improving the quality of teaching, the teaching environment and performance expectations.
We hear concerns of our military weakness regarding troop size – I would expect to see some legislation concerning the expansion of our military manning requirements.
Yes, John Kerry has deep and vital concerns regarding the well being of our union. Lets take 1 and a half minutes and review his ENTIRE SENATE CAREER.
Five Bills that have his name:
• S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)
• S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)
• S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming “to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations.” (1994)
• S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects “to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America’s coastal resources.” (1991)
• S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)
Two Bills that were altered and finally passed
• H.R.1900 (S.300): Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)
• H.R.1860 (S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)
Four Joint Resolutions
• S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 – Oct. 28, 1989 “World Population Awareness Week.” (1989)
• S.J.Res.160: To renew “World Population Awareness Week” for 1991. (1991)
• S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 “Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day.” (1992)
• S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992 “National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992)
Please see Factcheck.org for the complete listing of this legislation.
Two bills, H.R..1860 and S.791 did deal with an apparent concern for the “rich”, providing them more government money for research and grants women owned business grants. That’s it. These are the only bills of John Kerry. These are what must address the many ills John Kerry is claiming is affecting our country the must be fixed and that he will fix when elected President. A total of 11 pieces of legislation in 20 years that can be easily reviewed in 1 and a half minutes.
So, spend three minutes to evaluate warrior and elected official John Kerry. His lack of competence, courage and vision is staggering. By almost any measure, this man is not fit to lead America is this most perilous time.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Don't You Just Love The French??!!
Don't you love the French? I am certain Kerry can work with these folks, don't you??
===========
"Chirac lashes out against US cultural domination"
Thu Oct 07 2004 21:37:42 ET
French President Jacques Chirac warned Thursday of a 'catastrophe' for global diversity if the United States' cultural hegemony goes unchallenged.
Speaking at a French cultural center in Hanoi ahead of Friday's opening of a summit of European and Asian leaders, Chirac said France was right to stand up for cultural and linguistic diversity.
The outspoken French president warned that the world's different cultures could be 'choked' by US values.
This, he said, would lead to a 'general world sub-culture' based around the English language, which would be 'a real ecological catastrophe'.
Citing Hollywood's stranglehold over the film industry as an example, Chirac stressed that only with government assistance could countries maintain their cultural heritage.
Vietnam is a former French colony, but only around 375,000 of its 81 million people speak French. English is considered by most people a far more valuable and practical second language, particularly among businessmen."
===========
"Chirac lashes out against US cultural domination"
Thu Oct 07 2004 21:37:42 ET
French President Jacques Chirac warned Thursday of a 'catastrophe' for global diversity if the United States' cultural hegemony goes unchallenged.
Speaking at a French cultural center in Hanoi ahead of Friday's opening of a summit of European and Asian leaders, Chirac said France was right to stand up for cultural and linguistic diversity.
The outspoken French president warned that the world's different cultures could be 'choked' by US values.
This, he said, would lead to a 'general world sub-culture' based around the English language, which would be 'a real ecological catastrophe'.
Citing Hollywood's stranglehold over the film industry as an example, Chirac stressed that only with government assistance could countries maintain their cultural heritage.
Vietnam is a former French colony, but only around 375,000 of its 81 million people speak French. English is considered by most people a far more valuable and practical second language, particularly among businessmen."
Violence increases as Democrats spin slowly out of control!
I have been reading, with increasing frequency, of violence being used against Republicans. Both individuals and campaign centers.
Professor Bainbridge has summarized these events to date here.
I find this trend disappointing and a bit disquieting. Is the Democratic party truly so desperate to regain the Presidency and control of Congress that it is willing to resort to violence??
Even more disturbing is the total LACK of condemenation by anyone associated with the Kerry campaign. I will assume that this can only mean that the Kerry/Edwards ticket approves of these tactics and endorses them.
Which brings me to concerns of a post-election win by President Bush. I do believe he will win. And, I do not honestly think it is as tight as folks believe. However, regardless of margin, I also fully expect a full frontal assault by the Democratic Party on the election results. At last count over 7,000 Democratic lawyers have been readied for this assult. Is it any wonder that trial lawyers are now the single largest special interest block when it comes to Democratic donations??
This evolution speaks volumes about the vision of the Democratic party for America. If their vision comes to pass, we will no longer have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" but will have a government who will dictate "what the people can do, where the people can do it and how the people must do it". A stance that can bring nothing but ill to our great country.
Professor Bainbridge has summarized these events to date here.
I find this trend disappointing and a bit disquieting. Is the Democratic party truly so desperate to regain the Presidency and control of Congress that it is willing to resort to violence??
Even more disturbing is the total LACK of condemenation by anyone associated with the Kerry campaign. I will assume that this can only mean that the Kerry/Edwards ticket approves of these tactics and endorses them.
Which brings me to concerns of a post-election win by President Bush. I do believe he will win. And, I do not honestly think it is as tight as folks believe. However, regardless of margin, I also fully expect a full frontal assault by the Democratic Party on the election results. At last count over 7,000 Democratic lawyers have been readied for this assult. Is it any wonder that trial lawyers are now the single largest special interest block when it comes to Democratic donations??
This evolution speaks volumes about the vision of the Democratic party for America. If their vision comes to pass, we will no longer have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" but will have a government who will dictate "what the people can do, where the people can do it and how the people must do it". A stance that can bring nothing but ill to our great country.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
"We have a plan!!"
So the cry from the Kerry/Edwards campaign goes! Yes, in deed, they have a plan. Unfortunately no one really knows what it is. There are the "Four Points". From the Kerry website, here they are:
===============
Internationalize, because others must share the burden.
Train Iraqis, because they must be responsible for their own security.
Move forward with reconstruction because that's an important way to stop the spread of terror.
Help Iraqis achieve a viable government, because it is up to them to run their own country.
===============
A couple of thoughts on this "plan for winning the peace".
Internationalize the effort: Senator Kerry, today, had to admit that the chance of France and Germany contributing troops to the efforts were zero. And, with NATO already heavily involved in Afghanistan, the probably of additional troops from that organization is likewise doubtful. Of course, there is our current coalition of the "bribed and coerced" we could look to. However, that smoke you see in the distance are the bridges that Senator Kerry is in the process of burning. Our primary resource for fighting troops are the Iraqi people themselves. It would behoove Senators Kerry and Edwards to acknowledge their incredible sacrifice and their courage in this undertaking. The internationalization process is a dead end.
Train Iraqis. Golly, what a concept. If only President Bush had thought of that. It is such an amazingly inept point and argument, I can't bring myself to comment on it seriously.
Move forward with reconstruction. Really? Why I thought we would probably leave the country an ash heap! How about the thousands of schools that have been repaired an opened? How about the hospitals? How about the restoration of power, sewer and water treatment? Obviously work remains, but testimony given by soldiers and Iraqi bloggers clearly show much more progress in being made than is being reported.
Help Iraqis achieve a viable government. I wonder who Senator Kerry will select to run it?? After Joe Lockhart's comment about PM Allawi, he obviously is unwilling to work with the interim government. I believe he should clearly state who his pick for PM will be and how he plans to put him in charge.
Basically, it seems the key to the success of the Kerry plan is that he will do it faster and better. Had I known that, I would have run for President!! I have a plan to resolve the entire Mideast situation, including Israel, Iraq, Iran and all the other little hot spots by mid December. Really, before Christmas all will be well in that part of the world, because I have a plan.
No, really, I do have a plan, and it's good too.
Really really good! It's secret, of course, but it's really really really good!!!
====================
===============
Internationalize, because others must share the burden.
Train Iraqis, because they must be responsible for their own security.
Move forward with reconstruction because that's an important way to stop the spread of terror.
Help Iraqis achieve a viable government, because it is up to them to run their own country.
===============
A couple of thoughts on this "plan for winning the peace".
Internationalize the effort: Senator Kerry, today, had to admit that the chance of France and Germany contributing troops to the efforts were zero. And, with NATO already heavily involved in Afghanistan, the probably of additional troops from that organization is likewise doubtful. Of course, there is our current coalition of the "bribed and coerced" we could look to. However, that smoke you see in the distance are the bridges that Senator Kerry is in the process of burning. Our primary resource for fighting troops are the Iraqi people themselves. It would behoove Senators Kerry and Edwards to acknowledge their incredible sacrifice and their courage in this undertaking. The internationalization process is a dead end.
Train Iraqis. Golly, what a concept. If only President Bush had thought of that. It is such an amazingly inept point and argument, I can't bring myself to comment on it seriously.
Move forward with reconstruction. Really? Why I thought we would probably leave the country an ash heap! How about the thousands of schools that have been repaired an opened? How about the hospitals? How about the restoration of power, sewer and water treatment? Obviously work remains, but testimony given by soldiers and Iraqi bloggers clearly show much more progress in being made than is being reported.
Help Iraqis achieve a viable government. I wonder who Senator Kerry will select to run it?? After Joe Lockhart's comment about PM Allawi, he obviously is unwilling to work with the interim government. I believe he should clearly state who his pick for PM will be and how he plans to put him in charge.
Basically, it seems the key to the success of the Kerry plan is that he will do it faster and better. Had I known that, I would have run for President!! I have a plan to resolve the entire Mideast situation, including Israel, Iraq, Iran and all the other little hot spots by mid December. Really, before Christmas all will be well in that part of the world, because I have a plan.
No, really, I do have a plan, and it's good too.
Really really good! It's secret, of course, but it's really really really good!!!
====================
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
The Kerry Campaign - In search of the truth!
If John Kerry would only be as interested in SPEAKING the truth as he is SEARCHING for it!!
==========
Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton
Contrary to this ad's message, Cheney doesn't gain financially from the contracts given to the company he once headed.
==========
Honestly, Halliburton is getting old, old, old, old!
==========
Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton
Contrary to this ad's message, Cheney doesn't gain financially from the contracts given to the company he once headed.
==========
Honestly, Halliburton is getting old, old, old, old!
Will America have any allies left if Kerry is elected?
Senator Kerry speaks mightily about the need for additional allies in our war on terror. But, will he be able to keep the ones we currently have fighting side by side with us today.
==========
POLISH PRESIDENT SLAMS KERRY AFTER DEBATE SNUB
Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski has slammed Dem president hopeful John Kerry for not recognizing Poland's contributions and sacrifice to the war in Iraq.
"It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral," Kwasniewski told FACTS in an interview commenting on the US Presidential Debate.
"It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience underestimates Polish sacrifice, this is sad."
The Polish President added however that one should consider this was a part of the ongoing electoral campaign.
"I do not think this was out of ignorance," the president emphasized on the TVN Facts.
"There is one thing which should be stated clearly: this coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain, Australia alone; it also involves participation of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who have died. It is immoral not to recognize the involvement we contributed based on our conviction that there should be unity in fighting terrorism, that there was a need to display international solidarity and that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous individual of this world."
"President Bush acted like a real Texan gentleman, he made sure to show appreciation for other countries' involvement in the coalition," Kwasniewski pointed out.
==========
Building a broader coalition?? Really??
==========
POLISH PRESIDENT SLAMS KERRY AFTER DEBATE SNUB
Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski has slammed Dem president hopeful John Kerry for not recognizing Poland's contributions and sacrifice to the war in Iraq.
"It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral," Kwasniewski told FACTS in an interview commenting on the US Presidential Debate.
"It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience underestimates Polish sacrifice, this is sad."
The Polish President added however that one should consider this was a part of the ongoing electoral campaign.
"I do not think this was out of ignorance," the president emphasized on the TVN Facts.
"There is one thing which should be stated clearly: this coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain, Australia alone; it also involves participation of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who have died. It is immoral not to recognize the involvement we contributed based on our conviction that there should be unity in fighting terrorism, that there was a need to display international solidarity and that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous individual of this world."
"President Bush acted like a real Texan gentleman, he made sure to show appreciation for other countries' involvement in the coalition," Kwasniewski pointed out.
==========
Building a broader coalition?? Really??
Monday, October 04, 2004
Kerry “Won”??
I have taken a few days to gather my thoughts about the debate between Senator Kerry and President Bush last Thursday. Not surprisingly, Senator Kerry was declared the “winner” and the Democratic spin machine is in high gear to generate some kind of traction for Kerry going into the home stretch of the 2004 election. Let me offer my own personal POV of the debate.
Yes, I will give Senator Kerry the “win” for style. He seemed polished, confident, eager and in command. And, it appears I am in good company on this account as the media, the DNC and most Republicans grant that Kerry won the style battle. And, all polls since the debate follow the same line of reason proclaiming loudly in both headline and news story that Kerry won the first round.
However, an interesting little tidbit buried within the polls is the fact that President Bush won the night on substance. The vast majority of people believe President Bush will do a better job protecting us, a better job on the war in Iraq and a better job fighting the war on terrorism. Hummmmmm, why not headlines proclaiming “Bush’s tough policy on war on terror leads to debate win!”
I find I am stunned that style takes such precedence over substance in the debate arena. How will style protect me, my family and my country from the next terror attack? How will style assure the Iraqi people they will have a chance to taste true freedom in their lifetime? How will style insure that the animals that killed 3,000 Americans, thousands world wide, and hundreds of children in Russia will be brought to justice? How will style insure that our military is well trained and equipped? How will style put the fear of God into the soul of the terrorists seeking to kill any and all that refuse to bend to their will?
So where does John Kerry intend to lead the United States in the event he is elected?
First, it appears he is not interested in leading at all but is interested instead in discourse and debate. He is interested in convening a summit of world leaders to let them know they can once again do business with Iraq and that they are now expected to bleed at least 50% of the blood for a free Iraq. Of course, the recent and very public pronouncements by France and Germany that they have no interest in supplying combat troops seems to not have been heard by Senator Kerry.
Future threats to the US will be handled much more appropriately. First, they will be run through “President” Kerry’s “global test”. I will not hop on the train teasing him about this test, I realize it was simply a poorly phrased response. However, it is very obvious that what this means is that he will FIRST consider how he will be able to defend his actions to the world and then act accordingly. I would just like to know just what US position has the world embraced of late? Certainly not our actions in Iraq, or many of our actions in Afghanistan, or our support of Israel, or our peace plan for the Palestinians, or our development of a missile defense system, or our decision not to sign Kyoto, or our decision not to enter into the International Criminal Court, or our resistance to a global internet tax, to name just a few positions that have raised the hackles of the international community.
Will “President” Kerry now reverse course on these issues just because they are unpopular with the global community even though virtually all are in the best interest of the US?
I am comforted by his assurance that he will RESPOND to any attack aggressively. Unfortunately, given that Al Qaeda has stated their goal is 4 MILLION American dead, I find I am a little dismayed this must happen FIRST before a response can be launched.
As for the war in Iraq, just how would “President” Kerry act? First, this war obviously does not come close to passing the global test. While he clearly states he would finish the job, the right way, he offers little detail. Obviously, he would expand the coalition forces. The only problem with that is that reluctant allies of the past show no signs of releasing troops to the cause. And, the coalition of the “bribed and coerced”, after being so completely insulted by “President” Kerry could hardly be expected to up their troop or support levels. In fact, after the able assistance of his sister campainging against Prime Minister Howard of Austrailia, PM Howard may well be out of office and Austrailia's forces extracted from Iraq even before the November elections occur. A definite "boost" to our efforts in Iraq!
How about the governing council within Iraq and interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi? Kerry advisor Lockhart called Allawi a puppet. Does this mean that “President” Kerry would first remove Allawi, install someone acceptable to the global community and then finish the war? (How about Saddam?) What kind of working relationship will he be able to have with this “puppet”?
Just what kind of global involvement within Iraq by the global community would meet with “President” Kerry’s approval? Fortunately, we have recent history to look to for some kind of answer. In the summer of 1990, Saddam invaded his neighbor to the south, Kuwait. And, much to his credit, President George H. Bush forged a broad coalition that involved most of our current critics that successfully expelled Saddam from Kuwait. A masterful stroke of both statesmanship and military might – that still DID NOT PASS Senator Kerry’s global test because he voted against Gulf War I. The historical reality of a "President" Kerry is that there has not been, in the past 40 years, a global conflict worthy of the involvment of US ground troops.
History does provide an insight into a “President” Kerry’s world view. And, rather unsurprisingly, it is VERY consistent. In fact, one could say it is a “stylish” approach and can be traced back to his earliest speeches.
His graduation speech at Yale has been described as very anti-war, which was in style then. However, with his political life still before him, it was stylish to check the old military box so he enlisted in the Naval Reserve. During his “tour” in Nam, it was again stylish to see a bit of combat and certainly a style requirement to slap a few medals on the old uniform. However, his conscience was bothering him and fortunately it was still stylish to be anti-war upon his early exit from "the Nam" and his return to "the world". America hungered for a young, stylish anti-war hero who had “been there, done that” and lo-and-behold VVAW was born. New fashion tips required the throwing of medals, the improper wear of the military uniform and the pronouncement that baby killers were running amuck back in Nam, we had to get out!!!
Keeping his eye on the future ball of being President, and checking his presidential style sheet, citizen Kerry pursued his legal career and finally ran for public office. All this running up quite a tab, socialite Kerry married well – twice. All to quite stylish and powerful women. And, in the process, landing a Senate seat that he has occupied over the past 20 years, all the while racking up a political accomplishment sheet guaranteed to consume less space than is found on one of his desk’s post-it notes.
Which leads us back to today. Yes, Senator Kerry did indeed win the debate on style, he has been practicing for it his entire life. However, American and global security depend little on style. Without a core, without a direction, without clear and consistent convictions a “President” Kerry would be at the mercy of a hostile world and a deadly enemy.
I picture our enemies, huddled around the tube in some little hut in Faluja watching CNN and the debate. And I wonder which candidate created fear in their heart, the one who won on style or the one who won on substance?
Yes, I will give Senator Kerry the “win” for style. He seemed polished, confident, eager and in command. And, it appears I am in good company on this account as the media, the DNC and most Republicans grant that Kerry won the style battle. And, all polls since the debate follow the same line of reason proclaiming loudly in both headline and news story that Kerry won the first round.
However, an interesting little tidbit buried within the polls is the fact that President Bush won the night on substance. The vast majority of people believe President Bush will do a better job protecting us, a better job on the war in Iraq and a better job fighting the war on terrorism. Hummmmmm, why not headlines proclaiming “Bush’s tough policy on war on terror leads to debate win!”
I find I am stunned that style takes such precedence over substance in the debate arena. How will style protect me, my family and my country from the next terror attack? How will style assure the Iraqi people they will have a chance to taste true freedom in their lifetime? How will style insure that the animals that killed 3,000 Americans, thousands world wide, and hundreds of children in Russia will be brought to justice? How will style insure that our military is well trained and equipped? How will style put the fear of God into the soul of the terrorists seeking to kill any and all that refuse to bend to their will?
So where does John Kerry intend to lead the United States in the event he is elected?
First, it appears he is not interested in leading at all but is interested instead in discourse and debate. He is interested in convening a summit of world leaders to let them know they can once again do business with Iraq and that they are now expected to bleed at least 50% of the blood for a free Iraq. Of course, the recent and very public pronouncements by France and Germany that they have no interest in supplying combat troops seems to not have been heard by Senator Kerry.
Future threats to the US will be handled much more appropriately. First, they will be run through “President” Kerry’s “global test”. I will not hop on the train teasing him about this test, I realize it was simply a poorly phrased response. However, it is very obvious that what this means is that he will FIRST consider how he will be able to defend his actions to the world and then act accordingly. I would just like to know just what US position has the world embraced of late? Certainly not our actions in Iraq, or many of our actions in Afghanistan, or our support of Israel, or our peace plan for the Palestinians, or our development of a missile defense system, or our decision not to sign Kyoto, or our decision not to enter into the International Criminal Court, or our resistance to a global internet tax, to name just a few positions that have raised the hackles of the international community.
Will “President” Kerry now reverse course on these issues just because they are unpopular with the global community even though virtually all are in the best interest of the US?
I am comforted by his assurance that he will RESPOND to any attack aggressively. Unfortunately, given that Al Qaeda has stated their goal is 4 MILLION American dead, I find I am a little dismayed this must happen FIRST before a response can be launched.
As for the war in Iraq, just how would “President” Kerry act? First, this war obviously does not come close to passing the global test. While he clearly states he would finish the job, the right way, he offers little detail. Obviously, he would expand the coalition forces. The only problem with that is that reluctant allies of the past show no signs of releasing troops to the cause. And, the coalition of the “bribed and coerced”, after being so completely insulted by “President” Kerry could hardly be expected to up their troop or support levels. In fact, after the able assistance of his sister campainging against Prime Minister Howard of Austrailia, PM Howard may well be out of office and Austrailia's forces extracted from Iraq even before the November elections occur. A definite "boost" to our efforts in Iraq!
How about the governing council within Iraq and interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi? Kerry advisor Lockhart called Allawi a puppet. Does this mean that “President” Kerry would first remove Allawi, install someone acceptable to the global community and then finish the war? (How about Saddam?) What kind of working relationship will he be able to have with this “puppet”?
Just what kind of global involvement within Iraq by the global community would meet with “President” Kerry’s approval? Fortunately, we have recent history to look to for some kind of answer. In the summer of 1990, Saddam invaded his neighbor to the south, Kuwait. And, much to his credit, President George H. Bush forged a broad coalition that involved most of our current critics that successfully expelled Saddam from Kuwait. A masterful stroke of both statesmanship and military might – that still DID NOT PASS Senator Kerry’s global test because he voted against Gulf War I. The historical reality of a "President" Kerry is that there has not been, in the past 40 years, a global conflict worthy of the involvment of US ground troops.
History does provide an insight into a “President” Kerry’s world view. And, rather unsurprisingly, it is VERY consistent. In fact, one could say it is a “stylish” approach and can be traced back to his earliest speeches.
His graduation speech at Yale has been described as very anti-war, which was in style then. However, with his political life still before him, it was stylish to check the old military box so he enlisted in the Naval Reserve. During his “tour” in Nam, it was again stylish to see a bit of combat and certainly a style requirement to slap a few medals on the old uniform. However, his conscience was bothering him and fortunately it was still stylish to be anti-war upon his early exit from "the Nam" and his return to "the world". America hungered for a young, stylish anti-war hero who had “been there, done that” and lo-and-behold VVAW was born. New fashion tips required the throwing of medals, the improper wear of the military uniform and the pronouncement that baby killers were running amuck back in Nam, we had to get out!!!
Keeping his eye on the future ball of being President, and checking his presidential style sheet, citizen Kerry pursued his legal career and finally ran for public office. All this running up quite a tab, socialite Kerry married well – twice. All to quite stylish and powerful women. And, in the process, landing a Senate seat that he has occupied over the past 20 years, all the while racking up a political accomplishment sheet guaranteed to consume less space than is found on one of his desk’s post-it notes.
Which leads us back to today. Yes, Senator Kerry did indeed win the debate on style, he has been practicing for it his entire life. However, American and global security depend little on style. Without a core, without a direction, without clear and consistent convictions a “President” Kerry would be at the mercy of a hostile world and a deadly enemy.
I picture our enemies, huddled around the tube in some little hut in Faluja watching CNN and the debate. And I wonder which candidate created fear in their heart, the one who won on style or the one who won on substance?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)