Friday, October 22, 2004

John Kerry's Final Solution?

The Number One (#1) kneejerk slur hurled by the oh-so-tolerant denizens of the Left is some variant of "Nazi" (e.g. fascist, brownshirt, jackbooted, etc.) in violation of Godwin's Law. Not only is this a cheap and unfair tactic, it's also 180 degrees removed from reality as the largest supporters of anti-Semitism these days are found in Europe and their Annointed Bitch Boy, John Francoise Kerry.

A pair of scatching editorial have appeared recently which openly question Kerry's apparent desire to sacrifice Israel to the harsh mercies of the UN and the Palestinians in order to appease his ideological masters in Brussels and Paris.

First up is "Kerry The Clueless", which includes this:

So why am I still exercised about John Kerry?

It's the ramifications of his foreign policy in general, especially his fixation on the United Nations as the arbiter of international legitimacy, proctor of that "global test."

Save for the U.S. veto in the Security Council, Israel loses every struggle at the U.N. against lopsided majorities. In the General Assembly and the Human Rights Commission, Muslim states trade their votes to protect aggressors and tyrannies from censure in exchange for libels against the Jewish state. The body's bloated and dishonest bureaucracies are no better, as evidenced most recently by the head of the U.N. Palestine refugee organization, who defended having Hamas militants on his staff.

I've searched to find one time when Kerry — even candidate Kerry — criticized a U.N. action or statement against Israel. I've come up empty. Nor has he defended Israel against the European Union's continuous hectoring. Another thing that bothers me about Kerry is the deus ex machina he has up his sleeve: the appointment of a presidential envoy. It's hard to count how many special emissaries have been dispatched from Washington to the Middle East to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. What's easy to see is that none of them has gotten to "yes."

If that wasn't enough, today, Charles Krauthammer tears apart "Kerry's false plan for peace" with comments like:

He really does want to end America's isolation. And he has an idea how to do it. For understandable reasons, however, he will not explain how on the eve of an election.
Think about it: What do the Europeans and the Arab states endlessly rail about in the Middle East? What (outside Iraq) is the area of most friction with U.S. policy? What single issue most isolates America from the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations?

The answer is obvious: Israel.

In what currency, therefore, would we pay the rest of the world in exchange for their support in places like Iraq? The answer is obvious: giving in to them on Israel.

John Kerry says he wants to ``rejoin the community of nations.'' There is no issue on which the United States more fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. Last July, the General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150-6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone.

As you watch Kerry desperately lie and attempt to scare people into voting for him - cuz the Republicans want to draft the children and kill the old and Halliburton and wrong war and blurgleblah!!!, dontcha know? - in these ending days of "Pooch Screw 2004", ask yourself just how DOES he plan to bring the world "back to our side"? Who's gonna get sold out and who's going to pay the price for the UN/Kerry agenda of detroying Israel, America and anyone else who stands in the way of his Masters?

If you're one of the "we can't possibly do worse than Bush" people - think again.

I've wondered why the anti-war people are still gung-ho for Kerry as he's been yelling unconvincingly that he will track down and kill the terrorists wherever they are? Isn't he promising MORE WAR (albeit, a "smarter, more sensitive" war)? So, why aren't they fleeing to Nader or why didn't they support Kucinich? It's easy to understand when you know....

He's lying.

He can't be honest because to actually speak his true mind would result in a Mondale-sized whupping and the annihilation of the Democratic Party. Unfortunately for Team Kerry, he's got a 30 year history of subversion and collaborating with the enemy (do a Google on his dealings with the North Viet Namese and Nicaraguans) and a lengthy record of tasty quotes, like this one from the Washington Post (free reg required) :

Kerry's belief in working with allies runs so deep that he has maintained that the loss of American life can be better justified if it occurs in the course of a mission with international support. In 1994, discussing the possibility of U.S. troops being killed in Bosnia, he said, "If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."

Y'all got that? The only worthy death for a soldier is in the service of the UN, NOT the USA.

And he wants to be the Commander-In-Chief of the United States Armed Forces?

Liberalism is founded on elitism and hypocricy and if you like those things, JFingK's your feckless crapweasel! If you believe, as Kerry does, that America is a brutish, evil, imperialist thug state and only those nice people in that building that looks like the Monolith in 2001: A Space Odyssey on the East River can be trusted to determine where and when Johhny Smith from Podunk, Flyover should meet his Maker, then by all means yank that Donkey lever and bask in your smugness.

And when L.A. gets nuked by a joint UN/Al Queda strike team, be sure to come back here so I can call you a stupid muthaf*cka, alright? Thank you.

No comments: