Why Kerry Will Lose The Election. Liberals Hate America!!!!!!!!!
LIBERALS REALLY HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!


VIEW FROM THE RIGHT

Monday, August 9, 2004

John Kerry will lose this election, and he will do so decisively. The
defeat will go down as perhaps the only thing this candidate has ever
done decisively.

We've just seen a four-day infomercial called the Democratic National
Convention, where everyone put on his or her smiley face; Democrats
were having a love fest. It was a sea change from their previous
campaigning: For starters, they wouldn't even directly criticize the
president -- all that vile Bush bashing of the last few months turned
into gentle speeches with nary a mention of him. Secondly, the
vehemently pacifist and rabidly anti-war party did a 180 degree turn
around and created the most militaristic show since Eisenhower landed
in Europe.

Kerry, saying he's "reporting for duty," greeted Americans in the most
macho, Republican kind of way with a crisp salute. Then Kerry's fellow
Vietnam veterans, who, like him, served on the U.S. Navy's "swift
boat" patrol craft, swarmed the podium. Finally, Kerry's war-hero
service was retold to make sure Americans know he's really fit for
service as commander in chief.

Yet the casual observer could see through the cracks in the veneer.
That tired old huckster, the Rev. Al Sharpton, of Tawana Brawley hoax
fame, was given a prime-time speaking spot in which to share his
insight. He was a tough act to follow, but radical propagandist
filmmaker and all-around hate monger Michael Moore, seated beside
former President Jimmy Carter, was given the place of honor.

Not Much Bounce

Let's be serious; the convention was a grand flop. Following the
event, polls were all over the place: Some showed no postconvention
increase for Kerry at all, and others had a bounce so small it was
within the margin of error.

But the most seriously devastating of all
them all was the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

In that survey of likely
voters, President Bush led Kerry 50 percent to 46 percent.

Ouch --
that's gotta hurt. A Newsweek survey did show some good news for
Kerry, who picked up a few points in that vote. The bad news? It was
the most dreadful showing of any postconvention bounce in the decades
since the newsmagazine began measuring such shifts.

The Associated Press reported that its analysts say Bush is leading in
electoral votes today.

The weeks following the convention should be
the high point of any candidate's campaign, so that's another sad
marker.

Liberal New York Times syndicated columnist Maureen Dowd said it best:
Kerry's nautical theme made the convention look like a goofy scene
from "Gilligan's Island." You know you've got problems when you can't
shore up the Left.

A Convoluted Message

This was Kerry's moment in the sun to introduce himself to Americans
and talk about issues. Yet it was quite difficult among all his
rhetoric to figure out what he was for or against, or what he would do
differently.

If he has not defined himself by now to the American
people, any new self-definitions revealed as Election Day nears will
be a day late and a dollar short.

During the primary campaign, Kerry joined running mate John Edwards in
opposing Iraq liberation.

They were both influenced by the Deaniacs,
or, more accurately, former presidential contender Howard Dean's
formidable fund raising and momentum, which he earned primarily by
declaring how much he just hated the liberation of Iraq.

The fact that
both of the "me-too"s, Edwards and Kerry, voted for military
intervention in Iraq was a minor detail to be papered over: They were
misled. But do we really want folks in the White House who are so
easily duped?

Kerry has clearly indicated he was always against the war, but that
was after his vote in favor of the war, but not for war funding, which
should not be understood as support, and in any case he would have
done it much differently. His concern is now a lack of any real
coalition and U.N. support, but when the United States had the backing
of the United Nations and a real international presence in Desert
Storm after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Kerry voted against that
intervention. That information should clear it up for all those
undecided voters who really wanted to know.

On abortion, he's about the same: He's voted against a ban on
partial-birth abortion, but he has recently declared his belief that
life begins at conception.

That pronouncement should get everyone on
both sides of the issue to vote for him. At least we all know he's a
man of his convictions, and not just poll driven, like those other
big-haired, arrogant-looking politicians. Bush once characterized
Kerry's popularity by saying, in effect, of course he's popular,
adding, "He's been on every side of every issue." Kerry has no
cohesive message.

A Confusing Vietnam Record

Kerry has been using his "hero" status as one of his finest
achievements. But, as with much of what he does, he sends mixed
messages. He proudly brings out his handful of Vietnam veterans and
recalls his heroics, but, earlier, he testified before Congress and
wrote in his book, "Tour of Duty," that he committed war crimes, and
so did most of his comrades.

On swift-boat missions in Vietnam, Kerry wrote, "we established an
American presence in most cases by showing the flag and firing at
sampans and villages along the banks. Those were our instructions, but
they seemed so out of line that we finally began to go ashore, against
our orders, and investigate the villages that were supposed to be our
targets.

"We discovered we were butchering a lot of innocent people, and morale
became so low among the officers on those swift boats that we were
called back to Saigon for special instructions from Gen. Abrams," he
added. "He told us we were doing the right thing. He said our efforts
would help win the war in the long run. That's when I realized I could
never remain silent about the realities of the war in Vietnam."

Pity the poor guy who has to reach back 35 years to show America just
how great he is. And he does so very selectively: There's no mention
of all his medal ribbons tossed with contempt over the White House
fence for the same war he now fondly remembers. He brought a cast of
sailors out with him on the convention podium and keeps a contingent
with him at all times while campaigning, either to show Americans just
how patriotic he is or to remind us incessantly that he served a
grueling four months in Vietnam. For whatever reason, it's pathetic.
The peaceniks know all about his antiwar theatrics; he needn't
highlight those attributes. He's now going after the swing voter who
respects America military strength and may have or have had family
members in the service. In Kerry's world, you really can be all things
to all people.

Forget the showboating -- no pun intended -- let's look at the record.
Kerry received three Purple Hearts, and, after four months of duty, he
requested permission to get the heck out of there.

However, retired
Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who ran the swift-boat campaign in Vietnam and
now leads a group of fellow officers calling themselves the Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth, countered Kerry, saying, "I do not believe that
John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the
United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of
judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute
tenets of command.

"Only one of his 23 fellow officers in charge from Coastal Division 11
supports John Kerry," he added.

"Overall, more than 250 swift-boat
veterans are on the record questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as
commander in chief.

That list includes his entire chain of command --
every single officer Kerry served under in Vietnam.

The Kerry game
plan is to ignore all this and pretend that the 13 veterans his
campaign jets around the country and puts up in five-star hotels
really represent the truth about his short, controversial combat
tour."

You needn't go back 35 years to Vietnam to see what Kerry's all about.
Just check out his voting record in the Senate, where he's been for
the past 19 years. Can you name one piece of legislation he carried?
Don't worry; neither can anyone else.

As Bush said following the convention, "After 19 years in the United
States Senate, my opponent has had thousands of votes, but very few
signature achievements."

That's not leadership. Where's his big
health-care initiatives, or his education or environmental
improvement?

Talk is cheap. What has he done that's so memorable,
besides marry two extremely rich women?

Making Health Care Safe for Trial Lawyers

A centerpiece of Kerry's campaign is to make access to drugs and
medicine affordable, but, when you hear the word affordable, hold on
to your wallets. It means a health-care system that will rely on
billions of dollars of tax increases to prop up. But, taking a page
from John Edwards' "two Americas," as far as Kerry's concerned, only
the rich should pay the taxes. But don't relax yet; "the rich"
includes anyone with a job.

Increasing taxes for just the wealthiest 1
percent, or even the richest 10 percent, will not pay for a
singe-payer health-care system, which would cost several trillion
dollars annually and would federalize one-fifth of the economy.

Edwards has a lot of experience in the health-care industry. He became
one of the nation's richest trial lawyers by winning record jury
verdicts and settlements in cases alleging that botched treatment of
women in labor caused infants to develop cerebral palsy, a brain
disorder that causes motor-function impairment and lifelong
disability. In these trials, Edward would often rely on junk science
before North Carolina juries, claiming that a doctor's momentary
hesitation in deciding whether to perform a cesarean section on a
mother caused the brain damage. Edwards sometimes channeled a child's
thoughts in the courtroom, saying, in the case of a fetus about to be
born, "I'm having problems. I need out." This would be touching
showmanship for the Psychic Friends Network, but not for the White
House.

The real damage was not to babies such as that one, but to taxpayers,
who now have to foot the bill in higher medical costs due to increased
premiums

or who find that, because of prohibitively expensive
malpractice insurance, there are now far fewer practicing
obstetricians. To add insult to injury, we have to suffer through
Edwards, one of the richest senators, lecturing us on how there are
two Americas, and "ain't that a darn shame?" Just what America needs
-- a trial lawyer just a heartbeat away from the White House.

History on Bush's Side

No war president has ever lost an election in the United States,

and
it's unlikely this will be the case now. Until recently, the Democrats
uttered a great deal of rhetorical propaganda about their contention
that Bush "lied" about the war of liberation in Iraq: He lied about
intelligence; he lied about WMDs. He lied, lied, lied. Everyone from
the head of the Democratic Party to Michael Moore has delivered this
mantra for the last three years.

Now that the bipartisan 9/11 Commission has come out with its final
report, which vindicated the president,

you don't hear that much about
lies anymore. The report says there were no lies. Bad intelligence,
yes; lies, no.

Unfortunately, much of the damage has been done, as
Bush's "lies" have now become an urban legend, ingrained in the minds
of many.

The 9/11 Commission's report, which involved the investigation and
review of tens of thousands of pages of secret documents and
interviews of hundreds of key witnesses, found not a single lie.

Now that Kerry can't rely on Bush as liar, he will need to come up
with a novel new game plan. It'll be hard, but maybe he could have
Edwards channel the baby Jesus telling people whom to vote for. Short
of that, nothing will work.

Adam Sparks is a Bay Area writer. He can be reached at
adamstyle@aol.com.


URL:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/08/09/asparks.

----------
Liberals Hate America!