.John Kerry's Resume for Commander and Chief and Defender of the Working Man:
Protest with Jane Fonda, Accuse the American Military of War Crimes, and Marry
Two Women with Inherited Fortunes? Bring it On!
By George F. Holland Feb
8, 2004 (Magic City Morning Star Opinion)
Every time the Democrats place
all their intellectual resources behind a "winning" strategy they ultimately find
themselves on ice so thin that the heat from a single candle can melt the ice
beneath their feet. Today's democratic strategy is to base John F. Kerry's eventual
candidacy on the strength of his war record and his defense of the working class.
Howard Dean had not even finished the last note of his infamous screech before
this strategy was embraced by almost every liberal constituency of the Democratic
Party. These constituencies are now led by career operatives at the DNC, actors
in Hollywood whose careers are on the decline, and a parade of failed Democratic
candidates who now have time for party activities since they have nothing better
to do. I think this strategy will ultimately fail since John Kerry's congressional
record and life after Vietnam does not show he has the wisdom required to defend
our country or any possible connection to the working man.
Claim Number
One in the Kerry Campaign: John Kerry is eminently qualified to be Commander in
Chief of our military and to lead the war against terrorism because of his service
as a courageous young soldier in the 1960's. No one can dispute that John Kerry
volunteered to go into military service and won several medals during his time
in the Vietnam War. John Kerry's courage as a young man in the jungles of Vietnam
will forever deserve the gratitude and admiration of our nation. However, courage
as a young soldier does not automatically translate into wisdom as an older politician.
Let us examine how John Kerry translated his youthful combat experience into further
service to his country.
After he returned from active duty, he became a
leading anti-war activist and worked hard to support the anti-American programs
of radicals like Jane Fonda. He attended a seminar bankrolled by Fonda in Detroit
in February 1971 during which 125 self-proclaimed Vietnam veterans testified at
a Howard Johnson's about atrocities allegedly committed by our own forces. In
order to further ingratiate himself with his new friends he participated in and
even led efforts to humiliate and discredit our armed forces and our country's
leadership. Although, honest policy disagreements are a fundamental part of our
democratic system, symbolic gestures of hatred and disrespect for our country
are not. These acts of hate not only add no value to the national debate, but
encourage our enemies and discourage our allies. Both Jane Fonda and John Kerry
translated their disputes over our country's policy on Vietnam into the most heinous
acts of disrespect for our military and national character.
Pictures of
Jane Fonda on top of the very tanks which fired on and most likely wounded and
killed our troops gave the enemy a morale boost and public relations edge against
the United States. John Kerry, who was not invited to that particular photo shoot,
led his own efforts to embarrass and humiliate our military. Navy lieutenant John
Kerry, as leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, testified before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 23, 1971 that U.S. soldiers had "raped,
cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals
and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians,
razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally
ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." It is important to note that while
Lt. Kerry sat in plush offices on Capital Hill and testified that American soldiers
routinely committed these war crimes against Vietnamese civilians for fun, our
soldiers were still fighting and dying in the jungles of that country. Did John
Kerry's testimony provide additional justification and passion for the torture
of American soldiers at the hands of their North Vietnamese captures? We will
probably never know. Should a man who loved his country have made those inflammatory
charges in public while his brothers and sisters in the military were being held
prisoner? Absolutely not.
As a further public relations coup for our adversaries
and to gain more publicity for himself he then threw medals he claimed were his
own over the White House garden wall. However, as soon as his medals proved to
be a political asset as opposed to a publicity liability he confessed that the
medals he threw over the garden wall in fact were not his own and now displays
his own medals. He has used them for political advantage ever since and they are
now the centerpiece of his presidential campaign. We may never find out who owned
the medals he so callously threw over the garden wall or what sacrifices that
soldier endured to win those medals. I guess John Kerry wants us to honor his
medals which he now so prominently hangs on his wall more than he honored the
medals of that fellow veteran. I wonder if John Kerry would have thrown the veteran
over the wall wearing those medals if it would have resulted in better press or
more accolades from his anti-American admirers.
One would also think that
someone who fought and saw men die in the jungles of foreign lands would become
a passionate leader in the effort to provide better weapon systems or intelligence
support to other soldiers in harm's way. However, instead of working as hard for
our military as he did protesting against it, Mr. Kerry decided to spend his political
career attacking, berating and trying to cut funding for all systems and programs
to support the Defense Department and Intelligence Community. He used his position
in the Senate to label the CIA as "evil" and to fight to cut funding for our military
and intelligence production capabilities whenever possible. It appears that protest
partying with Jane Fonda against the military was a larger influence on Mr. Kerry
than actually serving in it.
Rather than defend the congressional record
he modeled after Ted Kennedy or the anti-military activities he modeled after
Jane Fonda, he has decided to attack the National Guard service of President Bush.
He has attacked the President for not attending certain activities during his
National Guard service while ignoring the fact that President Bush faithfully
fulfilled his military obligation and received an honorable discharge. Mr. Kerry
once again finds himself questioning the integrity and honor of the military.
For the military, without reservation, awarded President Bush an honorable discharge
while Mr. Kerry and his political hacks are questioning the military's evaluation
of President Bush's service even going as far as to equate service in the National
Guard to a dodge to avoid military service. That is why Mr. Kerry finds himself
attacking a man with honorable service in the National Guard while defending a
known draft dodger - Bill Clinton. Senator Kerry enthusiastically defended the
right of Bill Clinton to evade all military service in order to go to London to
protest against our troops while they were on the battlefield. We have to remember
he had much to gain politically in defending Bill Clinton and has even more to
gain in defaming President Bush. You can think of President Bush's National Guard
service as the medals of the unknown veteran which Mr. Kerry threw over the garden
wall.
This leads us to Claim Number Two of the Kerry Campaign: John Kerry
is a friend and defender of the working man. This will be a hard sell for a man
who received formal education by the Ivy League, formal training by anti-American
radicals like Jane Fonda and has lived the life of a millionaire living off the
inherited wealth of his two wives. As an Ivy League educated millionaire who did
not have to work for his fortune, Mr. Kerry never had to worry about the money
he earned, the taxes he paid, or the programs he and Ted Kennedy forced the rest
of us to pay for. Mr. Kerry's complete ignorance of what it is like to have to
live by what you earn is why he actively supports the practice of giving retired
millionaires monthly social security checks paid for by working men making $7
dollars an hour and trying to support a family; why he actively supports higher
taxes on small businesses so they can not hire more employees at higher wages;
and why he supports government programs which give undeserving people homes in
working class neighborhoods even when those neighborhoods are destroyed in the
process. Mr. Kerry Heinz is not effected when these neighborhoods are destroyed
and working class families lose the largest asset in their retirement plans -
their home's value.
If Mr. Kerry and his supporters believe that President
Bush should not lead the United States military since he did not serve in the
regular armed forces, than Mr. Kerry should not even claim to defend the working
man since he is living the millionaire lifestyle offered by his wife's inheritance.
As a matter of fact the only indication that Mr. Kerry understands economics
at all is that the inherited fortune of his second wife is larger than the inherited
fortune of his first wife. And unlike President Bush who once proudly wore the
uniform of the United States military, Mr. Kerry will never know what it is like
to wear the clothes of a working man. The real question is if our country is ready
to elect a president whose view of the military was shaped by Jane Fonda and whose
view of economics was formed by the inherited fortunes of two wives. If the Democrats
want to position the 2004 campaign around a debate on John Kerry's fitness to
become Commander in Chief or connection to the working man, I say, Bring it on.
*
* *
Communist Vietnamese honor John Kerry, the war protestor, as a hero
in their victory over the United States in the Vietnam War -- Part II. http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=20040604194804799
Communist Vietnamese honor John Kerry, the war protestor, as a hero
in their victory over the United States in the Vietnam War -- Part II. On Memorial
Day, May 31, 2004, Vietnam Vets for the Truth broke an extraordinary story about
a photograph hanging in the Vietnamese Communist War Remnants Museum (formerly
known as the "War Crimes Museum") in Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon). The photograph,
displayed in a room dedicated to foreign activists who contributed to the Communist
victory over America in the Vietnam War, shows Senator John Kerry being greeted
by Comrade Do Muoi, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam. Jeffrey
M. Epstein of Vietnam Vets for the Truth acquired the photograph during the Memorial
Day weekend in response to a general request for photographs and records detailing
Kerry's activities on behalf of the enemy
