Archive Logo.jpg

October 07, 2004

The Grand Diplomat in action.

Okay, John Kerry has admitted that he probably won't be able to get his best pals the Germans and the French to sign on for his Coalition of the Supremely-Intelligent-Smarmily-Smug-Indolent -Euro-Socialites to go pull Bush's fat out of the fire in Iraq.

Well, frankly Senator, I wouldn't join up with someone who has already surrendered, either.

The Massachusetts senator has made broadening the coalition trying to stabilize Iraq a centerpiece of his campaign, but at a town hall meeting yesterday, he said he knows other countries won't trade their soldiers' lives for those of U.S. troops. "Does that mean allies are going to trade their young for our young in body bags? I know they are not. I know that," he said.

With that inspiring leadership? Gee, what a shocker, Senator. If that's the "centerpiece" of Senator Kerry's otherwise somewhat vague plan for Iraq, I should be impressed how, again? And, it sounds like you're taking the "Well, I tried, that's it, strike the tents, let's go home." tone.

The good Senator's position reminds me of a cynical twist to the motto of the 1st Infantry Divsion (recently in the news for the Smackdown in Samarra). It also nicely contrasts President Bush's position on Iraq, vice the defeatist Senators:

The Bush 1st Infantry Division: No Mission Too Difficult. No Sacrifice Too Great. Duty First!

The Kerry 1st Infantry Divsion: No Mission, too difficult. No Sacrifice, too great. Duty? First, a nice Chardonnay.

Reality Check: Bush is a fighter. He's defined his job as protecting the United States from attack. The best way to do that, is to fight the bad guy on his own turf. As Dennis Miller observed :

That's why I like Bush. He doesn't over-think it. He wakes up every morning, jumps out of bed, lands on his two feet, scratches his balls, and says, "Let's kill some f@#@$ing terrorists!"

He wants to get them before they get us. Senators Kerry and Edwards are lawyers - they only want to get them *after* they have done something. After people are dead in downtown Manhattan.

As I wade through my hardback copy of the 9/11 Commission report (hey, it was cheap and I can read it anywhere) I note that the Commission slaps both the Clinton and Bush administrations for not being proactive regarding Bin Laden. And the Dems have piled on that aspect of the report. Catch that? The Dems say that Bush didn't do enough to protect the US against al-Qaeda. Yet, in the same breath - they condemn the President for going after another Bad Guy. Sure, as it looks now, Saddam didn't have the capability he wanted - but he had the groundwork to do it once vigilance was relaxed. Pretty much the same position bin Laden was in, eh?