Those of you who are wondering just how Senator John Kerry could possibly have lost the 2004 election to George Bush -- please take note of the current "controversy" regarding recent remarks Kerry made. A few days ago, Kerry told a group of college students that if they didn't study hard they might get "stuck in Iraq".
Anybody with even half a brain knows that Kerry was taking a swipe at Georgie, and not at the troops. Our troops ARE stuck in Iraq through no fault of their own. The fault lies completely with Georgie and his Republican henchmen.
But this is an election year, so the Republicans jumped on the remark and said Kerry was insulting our troops. The Republicans are fixing to lose the House and quite possibly the Senate, so they are taking any opportunity to smear any Democrat, even if they have to lie to do it. Kind of reminds me of the "swift boat" lies the Republicans told in the 2004 campaign.
So what did Kerry do? The same thing he did in 2004 -- he wussed out. He goes on Don Imus' radio show and apologizes for his remark. I couldn't believe it. Do you think a Republican would have apologized for a similar remark? Of course not! They know that to apologize when you've done nothing wrong is perceived by most people to be a sign of weakness. They would have fought back.
That is why Kerry lost the 2004 election. People would rather vote for someone they don't like, over someone who is weak and won't defend himself. But Kerry is not just hurting himself. His actions give the impression that the Democrats in general are also weak and unwilling to fight, since they are the ones who nominated him to be their candidate.
Kerry has been making noises like he is going to run again in 2008. I hope he doesn't. The Democrats must nominate a real fighter if they want to take the White House. Why would a voter think he'll defend the country, if he won't even defend himself against Republican lies?
That is one of the reasons I supported Howard Dean so passionately in 04. He didn't take any crap off any Republican. He started getting a little punchier when he started trying to appeal to "the center," but I think he had some of the things going for himself that voters like so much in Bush: he didn't cast about for an answer--he knew what he believed. That kind of certainty plays well in the charisma market and no one seems to care if you are right or wrong in your belief so long as you don't have to deliberate too long and then hold on tenaciously in the face of data to the contrary.
ReplyDeleteStill, by the time they got through giving Howard the treatment for the infamous scream, he was a beaten man. It's rough out there and you have to be mean to compete. There just aren't that many mean Democrats anymore. The ghost of LBJ must be groaning every time he sees John Kerry on his heavenly Fox Channel. Windsurfing? Kerry needs a long eared dog to abuse.
Every time I see Kerry now, I remember him standing at a podium at an appearance that was covered on national television. A real chance to shine. He had a bottle of Dasani water on the podium which he would occasionally pick up and suck on like it was a baby bottle. It would have been so easy to put a glass of water on the podium. Or he could have handled it like a longneck--straight overhead with a little trickle down the side of his face to wipe off with his sleeve. A nice loud belch. Then -- "ahh, this stuff tastes just like snot."
There's the John Kerry that wins electoral votes in Texas.
The only objection I have to your analysis is that I'm not sure Kerry did lose in 2004 -- and, even if the Bush election was legitimate, it was a very, very close election. We make too much of the failures of the last two Democratic Party Presidential candidates, when niether of them did badly at all.
ReplyDelete