Severe Hurricane Warning
By Tom Barrett (10/06/04)
The National Weather Service has issued a warning for yet another catastrophic hurricane following on the heels of Ivan and Jeanne. The path of this hurricane zigs and zags, and is therefore highly unpredictable. At times its winds spin counter-clockwise, then it abruptly reverses direction. Experts predict that this one will cause the most damage to the United States that we have experienced in four years. They are naming this one Hurricane Kerry. Be advised, the only way for citizens to protect themselves is by hiding behind a Bush.
One of the joys of writing this weekly column is that I receive interesting and sometimes amusing anonymous emails from our hundreds of thousands of readers. The paragraph above is one of these. After viewing the first presidential debate last Thursday, the "warning" above seems particularly appropriate.
I cannot emphasize enough the importance of voters understanding John Kerry's personality before entering the voting booth a month from now. You thought Bill Clinton governing by polls was bad? Spineless as he was, at least he was making his decisions based on what people said. Imagine John Kerry governing by what he thinks people are thinking.
I won't spend much space in this article damning Kerry with his own words. Bob Webster and R.A. Hawkins have both done a marvelous job of collecting Kerry's past contradictory statements in their articles posted on this week's issue of www.ConservativeTruth.org.
Instead, I would like to concentrate on the sad collage of lies, mischaracterizations, contradictions and outright confusing statements Kerry made just this week in the debate.
But first, a word about who "won" the debate. A Newsweek "snap poll" taken right after the debate showed that 53% of viewers feel that Kerry "won." But what does that mean? It doesn't mean they are more likely to vote for him. The President actually rose one point in the polls taken immediately after the debate. It doesn't mean that they like him. The same polls that indicate that Kerry "won" show that the respondents like and trust Bush more than Kerry. And it doesn't mean that they feel safer with him. An overwhelming majority said that they felt that Bush would keep the nation safer from terrorists and would lead the world to victory in the war on terror.
The Newsweek poll was taken from a very small sample of only 1000 randomly chosen people. A San Francisco Chronicle poll taken after the debate is much more accurate, because the same people were polled before the debate. The result? No change in who they would vote for. They found the debate interesting, but no minds were changed.
So what do those polled mean when they say Kerry "won"? It means that he's a better talker. In their heads they feel Kerry out-talked Bush, but in their hearts they still trust the President and plan to vote for him. When I pastured a church in the mountains of North Carolina I was often impressed with the down-home wisdom of the people there. When they said a man "talked good" it didn't mean that they respected him; it just meant that he was slick.
Kerry was slick Thursday, no doubt about it. And well he should have been. He stopped working at the job for which he is handsomely paid over a year ago. He has missed over 90% of his Senate votes since he started campaigning. He had several days to rest and prepare, during which he had a relaxing manicure and pedicure, had his hair "done", and enjoyed several tanning treatments. (The tan job, done to win back women voters who have been turning toward Bush, backfired on him. On TV he looked distinctly orange, causing TV pundits to nickname him "Agent orange.")
Bush, on the other hand, has a job that he takes seriously. He's running our country. Just before the debate he was in Florida, where we have been battered by four major hurricanes in six weeks (the first time that has happened since Texas suffered through six hurricanes in one season in the 1800's). Bush knew that we in Florida needed his leadership and encouragement. He also knew that he needed to take time to prepare for the debate. He chose to come here and help us, and Florida Democrats and Republicans alike respect and appreciate him for that. He didn't talk as slick as Kerry. But he spoke what America wanted to hear - the truth.
Kerry has lied so much and so often that he doesn't even know what truth is any more. During the debate he spoke forcefully about "hunting down and killing the terrorists" (words stolen from Bush, by the way). Does he actually think America has forgotten that he has done everything in his power to undermine the war on terror? He called the war in Iraq "a mistake." Bush was quick to challenge him by asking, "Does that mean that our warriors gave their lives for a mistake?" Kerry was forced to answer no. Flip-flop.
Kerry claimed that Bush refused to give our troops body armor, an outright lie. But he "forgot" to mention that he voted AGAINST the bill that provided the funds to buy that body armor. Flip-flop.
Kerry was confused, inconsistent, and often incoherent during the debate. "I well remember standing in Treblinka Square in Moscow…" after the fall of the Soviet Union. The problem is that Treblinka was a Nazi concentration camp in Poland. So much for the smooth, well-prepared "winner" of the debate who delights in ridiculing our President for minor mistakes.
Kerry lied a LOT during the debate. "Bush spent $200 billion in Iraq!" Actually, Congress authorized $200 billion, but only $120 billion has been spent. And Bush didn't spend that. Congress is the body that authorizes expenditures, as Kerry would know if he ever showed up for work.
During the debate Kerry said with great sincerity (he lies well), "Weapons of Mass Destruction have been pouring across the border into Iraq." Gee, that's interesting. I wonder why no one - no international body, no news organization, no other nation - is aware of Kerry's supposed WMD's? Maybe al Qaeda only told Kerry…
Kerry spoke of a "back door draft", referring to the various call-ups of reserves. He hurt himself with that statement. Talk shows received thousands of calls from irate reservists who said, "We're not draftees. We volunteered to be in the reserves, and we knew we could be called up."
His statement goes along with the scare campaign the Democrats have been conducting to help Kerry. They've been saying that Bush plans to reinstate the draft, although Bush has stated publicly many times that he has no such intention. "Your children may be forced by Bush into the service to die in the war on terror." Actually, there is legislation in both houses of congress to reinstate the draft. The interesting thing is that both bills were introduced by DEMOCRATS! They know that most Americans know little about how Congress works, and that people will believe the Republicans are behind the bills because the liberals lie about such things so often.
But do not fear: Kerry has a plan for Iraq. You've heard him and his flunkies speaking about his "Four point plan to win the peace in Iraq" over and over for weeks. Well, he has finally revealed it. Here it is:
1) Increase the number of Iraqi police and security forces.
2) Bring NATO into Iraq.
3) Hold elections in Iraq.
4) Get more nations involved in Iraq.
There's only one problem with Kerry's plan: It is Bush's plan! Bush is already doing all of these things.
1) We, along with our allies, have been training tens of thousands of Iraqis to defend their own nation from terrorists. By the way, these terrorists have been encouraged and emboldened by Kerry's mixed signals and outright denigration of the war effort. I believe Kerry's statements have caused the deaths of many Iraqis, US troops, and Western civilians because the terrorists think Kerry will be elected and will pull our troops out of Iraq.
2) NATO is already in Iraq, a fact Kerry obviously missed while he was getting his pedicure and facial. NATO troops are training Iraqis in advanced techniques that will help them destroy the terrorist threat in their own nation.
3) Elections will be held in Iraq on schedule. Polling places are being established, voters are being registered, and democracy is about to bloom in Iraq. Yes, there may be some places where voting cannot take place, but that has happened in our own nation. (Read Mary Mostert's article on this subject on our website this week.)
4) At various times during the Iraq war there have been thirty to forty nations involved in the war and the reconstruction efforts. Kerry repeating the lie over and over that the "US is going it alone in Iraq" does not make it so. A lie is a lie, however often repeated.
Kerry did have one new idea this week: A summit. President Bush said it best during the debate: "I never saw a summit that deposed a dictator or stopped a terrorist." (Not a bad comeback for a "good 'ole boy" from Texas.) Kerry didn't reveal who would be invited to this summit, or what he hoped it would accomplish. It would be just another useless debating society like the UN. Iraq needed action, not more talk. Action deposed Saddam, and action will defeat the terrorists coming into Iraq from Iran.
Kerry tried to portray himself as a man of action who could win the war in Iraq. How can a man who doesn't believe in the war, who calls it "The wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place," win the war? Winning takes courage and conviction. Kerry would not win in Iraq. We would leave Iraq with our tail between our legs if Kerry were to be elected. He would take joy in that, just as he took joy in seeing us defeated in Viet Nam, thanks largely to his lies.
Kerry would have us believe that he could pull together a coalition of nations to help in Iraq. Bush has already put together a coalition of all the nations who believe in the war on terror. France, Germany and Russia will never get involved because they were the ones selling Saddam his weapons and making billions from their perfidy. China will never get involved because they are a terrorist nation that sells rockets to would-be terrorist nations.
Besides, what exactly would Kerry do to convince other nations to join us? Would he insult them, as he has already insulted our current allies so many times? I'm sure that would encourage the undecided! And while we're on the subject of insults, what about the way he denigrated Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi when he visited the US? Kerry questioned Allawi's honesty and integrity and said that his visit was just a big photo opportunity to help Bush get reelected. Kerry the diplomat…
But the most dangerous statement Kerry made in the debate was when he said that he would never send US troops to defend us unless the situation would "pass the global test." I am not kidding. Those were his exact words. I couldn't believe that he would make such a treasonous statement, so I replayed the tape I made of the debate. There it was. Our defense would depend on whether it would "pass the global test."
Forget about the fact that Kerry is pro-abortion, pro-UN, pro-homosexual marriage, pro-big government and bigger taxes, and against just about every traditional value that most Americans hold dear. His "Global Test" statement alone should send every patriotic American to the polls to vote for President Bush.
This is not a new sentiment for Kerry. He espoused getting "international" permission to commit US troops after Viet Nam. He reiterated this traitorous policy in his book, "The New Soldier" (see www.WinterSoldier.com). And he has consistently (perhaps the only consistent policy we have ever seen from Kerry) supported the concept that the US should get permission from the UN before defending itself.
John Kerry is a dangerous man. He is a danger to our nation. He is a threat to your family's security. Don't take my word for it. Read the articles mentioned in this column. Go on the Internet and do a search for his statements. He tried to remake himself in the debate, but he is still the same John Kerry who believes that "sophisticated" France is superior to the US, and that our nation is a bunch of barbarians.
He has tried to destroy all copies of "The New Soldier", but you can see the text on the link above. He has removed statements from his website that show his true colors, but fortunately you can never remove anything from the Internet completely. Do a Google search for whatever you want to verify from this column. If you click on the link to his site and he has removed it, fortunately Google has a link that says "Cached." This means that they made a copy of it before he could destroy it. Click it and you can read what he doesn't want you to see.
My fellow Americans, this election is far too important to trust the sound bites of a proven liar. Do your research. Learn what this lifelong politician is really about. The future of our nation depends on it.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Tom Barrett
