July 23, 2006

WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE, WHITE MAN?

Kerry knocks Bush on handling of Mideast conflict (Valerie Olander, The Detroit News, 7/23/06)

U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D- Mass., who was in town Sunday to help Gov. Jennifer Granholm campaign for her re-election bid, took time to take a jab at the Bush administration for its lack of leadership in the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.

"If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry during a noon stop at Honest John's bar and grill in Detroit's Cass Corridor.

Bush has been so concentrated on the war in Iraq that other Middle East tension arose as a result, he said....

Hezbollah guerillas should have been targeted with other terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaida and the Taliban, which operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Kerry said. However, Bush, has focused military strength on Iraq.

"This is about American security and Bush has failed. He has made it so much worse because of his lack of reality in going into Iraq.…We have to destroy Hezbollah," he said.

What in the world can this mean? President Kerry only wanted to pull the troops out of Iraq to send them to Lebanon? Leaving Saddam in power would have impressed Iran and Syria with our resolve? Hezbollah was in on 9/11? I know there's a high threshold, but this might be the stupidest thing John Kerry has ever said.

Posted by David Cohen at July 23, 2006 8:57 PM
Comments

Mr. Cohen;

It's worse than incoherent, it's a wonderful sound bite that will be useful to the GOP for years: "We have to destroy Hizballah — Senator John Kerry".

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at July 23, 2006 9:16 PM

President Kerry proves to be just as loony and unhinged as President Gore. Thank God for small favors.

Posted by: bill at July 23, 2006 9:19 PM

David:

Your analysis is spot-on. Additionally, I wonder if Americans really care about Israelis (at least at this stage) kicking a** on Arabs, when no American troops are involved. The news (broadcast and cable) is 24/7 about the 'conflict', but my sense is that the media interest is about the visual (bombs exploding and epaulleted anchors reporting same from the scene). I don't know many Americans who give a fig whether there is a cease-fire or not, at least right now.

Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at July 23, 2006 9:24 PM

Kerry can't see the forest from his tree.

Bush now has the entire (non-Syrian) Arab world aligned with Israel to pry Syria away from Iran. By any means necessary.

This is, er, non-trivial.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 23, 2006 9:48 PM

Why is anyone surprised? This reminds me of a Bush-loathing colleague I use to go round and round with, who said "I would've followed Bush into North Korea (after 9/11), they HAD W.M.D, but not IRAQ, because it was all a lie, blah blah blah...."

Well, after I picked myself up off the floor laughing, I mentioned minor details about the left screaming "no link! no link! no link!" etc.

But the point is, the Chairborne Divisions of the left have consantly proven themselves ferocious fighters against tyranny and terror... provided the fight in question is not actually happening, you understand. (John Kerry - "We will kill terrorists where we find them, etc")

It is only the when the battle goes from hypothetical chest beating to the tough, difficult, and painful slog through the downsides of ACTUALLY FIGHTING one where they can be counted on to take a pass, and say "No No No! We SHOULD be fighting, over THERE, or that OTHER group, or at some OTHER place....." anywhere, anytime, but where the battle actually happens to be at the moment. Every single time. Most uneqivocably if a Republican happens to be President.

But they sure do believe in standing up to tyrants and terrorists, boy howdy! Just listen to Mr. Kerry. We WOULDA been at war withn them Hezballer fellas long ago if HE had been in charge, yeppers!

Puh-frikkin'-leeze.

Posted by: Andrew X at July 23, 2006 10:11 PM

I'm thankful I wasn't taking a drink (it was Vernors) when I heard this on the news today or I probably would have made a mess spewing it all over the place. What a pile of Cow pasties!

Posted by: Dave W at July 23, 2006 11:05 PM

I don't know.... If I understand correctly, the Left is in charge of Israel now, and the normal protesters(there) are nowhere to be seen. Perhaps Mr. Kerry is letting us know the new compact? Force is a monopoly to be used only by the Left? Any attempt to use it by others will be stopped by any means available? It would explain a lot....

Posted by: Robert Mitchell Jr. at July 23, 2006 11:21 PM

Kerry sees only the crisis of the moment -- in this case, the Israeli conflict with Hezbollah -- and tagets his remarks to fit the moment, while keeping in mind that he A.) Has to maintain some sort of ideoloigical contact with the whackjob wing of the party to maintain any sort of viability versus Hillary in the 2008 primaries; and B.) Knows he can't go so far out into that territory that he alienates any liberal Jewish campaign supporters/donors, who really have woken up in the past two weeks to the growing overt anti-Semitism on the left but are hoping for a knight in shining armor who will allow them to remain in the Democratic Party without having to face who some of their compadres in the party are.

So he utters a line that is designed to assuage those people's fears while offering no evidence whatsoever to back up those claims, due to hs own fear that actually making a formal proposal will threaten to have him cast into the Joe Lieberman pergatory wing of the part by the Kos crowd and the DU posters. Totally spineless behavior that would only fool someone who believes in Israel's right to defend itself, but believes more that we're in the middle of the Fourth Reich under George W. Bush.

Posted by: John at July 23, 2006 11:50 PM

Would Bush have been allowed to make such an ungrammatical statement without adverse comment? "If I was president," indeed.

Posted by: GER at July 24, 2006 12:33 AM

"But the point is, the Chairborne Divisions of the left have consantly proven themselves ferocious fighters against tyranny and terror... provided the fight in question is not actually happening, you understand. (John Kerry - "We will kill terrorists where we find them, etc")

Don't forget Hillary's husband was going to pick up a weapon to defend Israel personally.

Some conservatives actually accused the left of being humorless. It's more hilarious than any jokes a conservative could have told.

Posted by: ic at July 24, 2006 1:43 AM

Kerry [has] to maintain some sort of ideological contact with the whackjob wing of the party to maintain any sort of viability versus Hillary in the 2008 primaries...

Does JFK have any shot at '08, regardless of anything that he might say or do ?
As I saw it, he won the Dem nod in '04 only by seeming "electable" compared to Dean; having failed to actually win against the man who "stole the Presidency in '00" and who "lied America into an unwinnable war", what does Kerry have to offer the Dems against a fresh new GOP face ?

Plus, Clinton has a dump-truck-full of money already, and will have an entire mountain of it by '08. That's hard to beat - it's how Bush was able to scare off all of the other GOP candidates in '99, less McCain.

Posted by: Noam Chomsky at July 24, 2006 3:24 AM

To that end, let's note that Kerry said this in Michigan, the most pro-Hezbollah state in the Union. Sometimes he's the anti-Clinton: it just pops into his head to say exactly what his audience doesn't want to hear.

Posted by: David Cohen at July 24, 2006 8:50 AM

Noam:

I don't think he has a chance, but I also don't doubt that in Kerry's mind, he and the missus are the only two candidates that matter. So he'll say things that are designed to cater to folks like Air America founder Sheldon Drobney, whose Huffington Post blog message of two weeks ago (which was picked up by Hugh Hewitt last Friday) perfectly captures the logical disconnect liberal Democratic supporters of Israel have to convince themselves of in order to avoid facing the reality of who they have alligned themselves with politically.

It's rich supporters like Sheldon that Kerry targets with his anti-Iraq/hyperbollically paranoid anti-Bush/pro-Israeli boilerplate remarks (Hillary makes similar remarks, but is smart enough to cast her votes in support of the Iraq conflict, which will come in handy when the 2008 general election rolls around). Kerry's statements are wooden and obvious pandering, but they target folks who desperately want to be pandered to.

Posted by: John at July 24, 2006 9:29 AM

David, what poll were you looking at? Or did you just blindly make that statement about Michigan being the most pro-Hezbollah state in the union because SE Michigan has the largest Arab population outside of the middle east? Besides, Kerry's immediate audience was not Arab. He was in the inner city courting the black vote for Granholm and demonstrating that he's comfortable being in "the hood".

Posted by: Dave W at July 24, 2006 11:53 AM

Like there's a difference...

Posted by: David Cohen at July 24, 2006 1:04 PM

So David, in the hayday of IRA bloodletting and terror would you have called Massachusetts the most pro-IRA state in the union?

Posted by: Dave W at July 24, 2006 2:15 PM

Of course MA was pro-IRA as were its Senators.

Posted by: oj at July 24, 2006 2:21 PM

Well, I might quibble whether it was Massachusetts or New York, but I'd certainly agree those were the top two.

Posted by: David Cohen at July 24, 2006 6:02 PM

Well, I might quibble whether it was Massachusetts or New York, but I'd certainly agree those were the top two.

Posted by: David Cohen at July 24, 2006 6:03 PM

They aren't terrorists if they share your ethnicity.

Posted by: oj at July 24, 2006 10:31 PM

AAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Posted by: ido at August 27, 2006 11:22 AM
« BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING FRENCH THAT AMERICANIZATION DOESN'T IMPROVE: | Main | DERANGING THE LANDSCAPE: »