Kerry's Turn
I've mostly defended Kerry from Bush's campaign attacks recently, so now it's time to turn it around a little.
I like John Kerry as a person, despite my disagreements with his politics, but I've always hated him when he is in campaign mode, when he embodies everything I hate about politicians and their partisan battles. He will say anything, no matter how obviously contradictory. He will manipulate and dissemble and lie through his teeth.
Case 1
This weekend, he offered an absolutely perfect example. He was at a pro-choice rally, and said that President Bush is unfit for office because he doesn't understand that "women's rights are just that -- rights -- not political weapons to be used by politicians in this nation." He asks everyone listening to forget that he is a politician, in this nation, using women's rights as a political weapon, while he condemns his opponent for supposedly doing the same thing. And also to forget that Bush and his campaign really haven't spent much time talking about abortion to begin with; Kerry uses women's rights as a political weapon a lot more than Bush does.
It's classic Kerry: take a point that is either minor, or completely made up, attack your opponent for it, pretend you don't do the same thing, and then feign innocence when attacked for it. Then, use their "unwarranted" counterattack on you as justification for even more aggressive attacks.
Case 2
Don't understand what I mean? Turn your attention to the battles over military service. Right now, Kerry and his people are complaining that Bush's campaign is attacking his military service. The problem is that it is not really true, and to the limited extent it is true, Kerry did the exact same thing to Bush in February.
Basically, the RNC and some others close to the Bush campaign said Kerry should answer the questions about his service, and release his records. So, Kerry says Bush is questioning his military service. But if so, then Kerry questioned Bush's, too:
That is all that the RNC did, that is the furthest the Bush campaign went. Some say, well, it wasn't the Bush campaign or RNC, it was talk radio, and other Republicans in Congress. Yes, and three months ago, it was the web sites and Democrats in Congress, not to mention the head of the DNC, who said Bush was AWOL. Again, the Democrats did it all first, and then whine when hit back in the exact same way.
And now Kerry is using the Bush counterattack on him as justification for direct attacks on Bush's military service. That's right, let it sink in: Kerry attacks Bush, Bush later attacks Kerry in the same way, and Kerry uses that to justify increased attacks on Bush. Machiavelli would be proud.
Case 3
This even extends to far less emotional issues. Kerry plans to help the economy and jobs by giving all American corporations a 5 percent tax cut.
Are you kidding me? Since when has Kerry been a supply-sider? Since when has Kerry not attacked supply-side economics?
Since the campaign began, of course.
I like John Kerry as a person, despite my disagreements with his politics, but I've always hated him when he is in campaign mode, when he embodies everything I hate about politicians and their partisan battles. He will say anything, no matter how obviously contradictory. He will manipulate and dissemble and lie through his teeth.
Case 1
This weekend, he offered an absolutely perfect example. He was at a pro-choice rally, and said that President Bush is unfit for office because he doesn't understand that "women's rights are just that -- rights -- not political weapons to be used by politicians in this nation." He asks everyone listening to forget that he is a politician, in this nation, using women's rights as a political weapon, while he condemns his opponent for supposedly doing the same thing. And also to forget that Bush and his campaign really haven't spent much time talking about abortion to begin with; Kerry uses women's rights as a political weapon a lot more than Bush does.
It's classic Kerry: take a point that is either minor, or completely made up, attack your opponent for it, pretend you don't do the same thing, and then feign innocence when attacked for it. Then, use their "unwarranted" counterattack on you as justification for even more aggressive attacks.
Case 2
Don't understand what I mean? Turn your attention to the battles over military service. Right now, Kerry and his people are complaining that Bush's campaign is attacking his military service. The problem is that it is not really true, and to the limited extent it is true, Kerry did the exact same thing to Bush in February.
Basically, the RNC and some others close to the Bush campaign said Kerry should answer the questions about his service, and release his records. So, Kerry says Bush is questioning his military service. But if so, then Kerry questioned Bush's, too:
"It's not up to me to talk about them or to question them at this point," Kerry said of the accusations. "I don't even know what the facts are. But I think it's up to the president and the military to answer those questions."
That is all that the RNC did, that is the furthest the Bush campaign went. Some say, well, it wasn't the Bush campaign or RNC, it was talk radio, and other Republicans in Congress. Yes, and three months ago, it was the web sites and Democrats in Congress, not to mention the head of the DNC, who said Bush was AWOL. Again, the Democrats did it all first, and then whine when hit back in the exact same way.
And now Kerry is using the Bush counterattack on him as justification for direct attacks on Bush's military service. That's right, let it sink in: Kerry attacks Bush, Bush later attacks Kerry in the same way, and Kerry uses that to justify increased attacks on Bush. Machiavelli would be proud.
Case 3
This even extends to far less emotional issues. Kerry plans to help the economy and jobs by giving all American corporations a 5 percent tax cut.
Are you kidding me? Since when has Kerry been a supply-sider? Since when has Kerry not attacked supply-side economics?
Since the campaign began, of course.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment