Kerry File Archives

John Kerry on the law

As of late, Senator Kerry has been running off the mouth about how "President Bush has clearly broken the law" in regards to the use of the NSA in gathering intelligence against terrorists that are domestically based.

I just remembered that prior to his current job, Senator Kerry was a Prosecutor in Massachusets.

Why do I bring it up? What's the chance that Kerry used the very same methods to fight crime in massachusets that he now is vigorously against President Bush doing against al-queda agents?

Oh, it gets better, Kerry wrote a book called "The New War" where he goes on and on and on about how we should really fight the war against international crime.

I once suffered through a review of it and I wrote about it here.

I'm going to go back in and see what the 'boston foghorn' has to say about surveilance. If you dont hear from me in a week, call for an ambulance.

Posted @ January 26, 2006 04:03 PM | Kerry File | Comments (3)

Teachers Pet?

So, What do we have here?

Senator Kerry pulling what appears to be a sheet of paper out of his pocket and putting it on the podium?

Ok, so what are you saying, Frank?

That Kerry may have received a list of questions prior to the debate, and this is his prepared "Cheat Sheet".

Oh, Come on, Jim Lerher wouldn't do that...

Who said anything about Jim Lerher? However, Jim doesnt work in a "fortress of solitude". Is it impossible to think that one of his PBS staff either helped someone else get the questions or got careless and left themselves open to compromise?

Jeez, do you really think they would go that far to win?

Are you kidding me? What are you, 12 years old?

Come on man, what other evidence is there that Kerry got an early look at the questions in the "debate?"

The only real evidence we will ever have is the debate itself. So, let's go back and watch and listen closely to his answers:

Did Kerry ever give an answer before the question was fully asked?

Did Kerry seem better prepared that is possible in situation where the question being asked is unknown?

Did Kerry give different answers in this session than in previous sessions where similar questions have been asked?

Did Kerry give any indication at all of precognition about what was going to be asked and what point in the debate a question would be asked?

I take my normal stance of remaining skeptical in situations like this, but it does answer what someone said in the initial moments after the debate " Boy, He sure looks polished...".

Yeah he sure did, the question is, did PBS Staff provide the cloth and silver cleaner for the tin man of Massachusetts?

( Mark Metcalf appears in the role of the Metaphysical Senator Kerry, courtesy of his Website, get this man some work people!)

Posted @ October 03, 2004 01:38 PM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

Miami Ham Festival

I know the papers are full of talk about how there is going to be a debate tonight. As I've said before, this is not a debate, its a jointly paid campaign advertisement. That being said, we can still have fun. Following the great college tradtion of the Bob Newhart game, let's try this:

Varifrank announces The First 'Miami Ham Festival' Contest:

Commentors who leave their guesses in the comments section of this post who come closest to predicting the most correct answers with the earliest post will win the contents of my desktop "penny jar". My "panel of experts" will help me determine the correct answers.

You must post a real email address, and your answers must be in prior to the beginning of the "debates"

1. Total number of times Vietnam is mentioned :
- By Kerry
- By Bush

2. The number of minutes into the debate that Kerry mentions "This Administration" in a condescending fashion.

3. The total number of times Kerry uses "This administration".

4. The number of minutes into the debate Bush issues the first "Presidential Malaprop".

5. The number of minutes before " changing positions" is mentioned by Bush.

6. The total number of times "the Economy" will be mentioned.
- By Bush
- By Kerry

7. The number of times Israel will be mentioned.
- By Kerry
- By Bush

8. Will Jim Lehrer make his bias obvious?

9. Will there be a Bernie Shaw "kitty dukakis " question?

10. The total Number of times "evil" is mentioned
- By Bush
- By Kerry

11. Which candidate gets the first laugh?

12. Which candidate gets the best takeaway line of the evening?

13. Which candidate makes the first " Poland is not communist" type gaffe.

14. Who mentions Osama first?

15. Who mentions Saddam First?

16. Who mentions France first?

17. Who says "compassion" or "failure" first?
- Kerry?
- Bush?

18. Who sucks up to:

- Florida hurricaine survivors
- Elderly voters
- African American voters
- Hispanic voters
- The "kids today"
- soccer moms

first?

19. Which candidate first uses his wife and kids to score points with the audience?

20. Who makes the biggest surprise statement of the evening, and on what subject.

The winner will be announced tommorow as I will be at a soccer game this evening with my daughter. Interesting parallel, 3 years ago I was at a soccer game with my son listening to the Gore/Bush debates. It's been a very busy 3 years, I look back on that time like it was a billion years ago,

Posted @ September 30, 2004 09:50 AM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

Apparently, The "F" Stands For "Fredo"

Today was a low point in American politics and a low point in the prestige of the country. Today, an American Senator skipped a joint session of Congress that was being addressed by a visiting head of state, a Guest of the American people. If that was all that had happened you could say it was a scheduling problem or that an illness had occured, forgiveable and understandable at some human level. Unfortunately, it didn't and it wasn't. 30 minutes after our guest spoke, the Senator, a petty little man, who seems to be getting smaller by the minute, broke with protocol and tradition and chose to dress down the man while he was visiting our country. Our guest is a man who 2 years ago lived under a death sentence, a man who who's life is at risk every day for simply standing in oppositon to those who want to turn his country into a charnel house. He is a man who has put everything at risk for just the hope of a better future.

The Senator did not offer praise for the personal bravery our guest has exhibited. He did not offer to meet with the man, to offer suggestions or even offer any support for his struggle. He just snarled in his little smarmy way and talked the big talk about "needing allies",while showing the Iraqi people that he didn't mean them. To people like the Senator, all Arabs are terrorists, and how foolish we are for thinking otherwise. How foolish we are for thinking that the little brown people of the middle east would want to be free. How foolish we are for trusting the "little wogs".

While the Senator and the Democrats talk the big talk about wanting rights for women and minorities, our guest is doing it, he's doing it while being shot at, while being reviled by many in his own country by many in his religion, and most certainly, he's doing it while being reviled by the leftists around the world and in this country. Leftists, who always scream about their own rights and how they are being violated seem very quiet when the rights of others are in jeopardy. While Democrats talk about "government helping people", our guest is doing it. While the Democrats and the Senator talk about America being an example to the world, our guest is being an example to all of us of grace under pressure, of selflessness, not selfishness, of putting the needs of the many ahead of the pride and desires for power of the one. Our guest could declare himself dictatior tommorow and no one would be surprised. Instead, our guest works against the advice and counsel of the world to bring his country, in the cradle of western civilization into the modern age and civility with the cooling salve of democracy.

When I watched our guest speak to our countries government, I felt a sense of pride, in my country, in our civilization, and I felt a certain pride for our guest. 30 minutes later, I felt a sense of shame that our country could treat this man and his culture so shabbily. When the Senator talked afterwards I was just watching a small man get smaller by using every life event as a chance to bloviate about his great ideas on what he would do for the world 'if only we would let him'. It was as if all that matters to the 'Incredibly Shrinking Senator' is that his craving for attention, his fixation on "the self" is satisfied.

His words, which could be used to elevate, educate and inspire are instead used as indictment against his country and his culture. His words have given strength to those who kill captives by beheading, who deny children the use of bathrooms while they hold them hostage, only to shoot them in the back later. At every opportunity where the Senator has had a chance to be clear about the resolve of this country in the defense of liberty, the Senator has chosen instead to spread confusion, fear, uncertainty and doubt. By doing so, he's put the world at risk. He's given hope to the monsters that our will can be broken and their goals can be met.

Once upon a time, another Democratic Senator from Massachusetts ran his campaign in West Virginia Appalachian country and was inspired to help the people he found there. Todays Democratic Senator from Massachusetts sneers down his nose at the little people who foolishly hold on to their small town values. Once, a Democratic Senator from Massachusetts would say words like " pay any price, bear any burden in the defense of freedom", todays Democratic Senator from Massachusets says "The wrong war, wrong time, wrong way". He offers no plan, no solution, no direction, only critique. Much like the weak screenwriter or incompetent actor who finds great pleasure and validation in becoming a theater critic, the Senator seems incapable of leadership, but finds great pleasure at providing critique for those who show it. What is that phrase we say behind their backs? "Those who can - do - those who cant..."

It would appear that the quality of Democratic Senators from Massachusetts is not a constant in the universe. It would appear that we will not find that the current crop of Democratic Senators from Massachusets being men who will go on to inspire the world. There will be no "let them come to Berlin" moment, no "Ask not what your country can do for you" inspiration leading a generation to take up the cause of freedom around the world.

What I saw happen today was the Senator do something I never expected. The Senator has decided he will not run from the firm liberal traditions of the Democratic party, a party whos theme song was once "happy days are here again", and ran from a solid pro-american positive future platform. The Senator has decided that he will run against the United States of America.

In the movie "the Godfather" is a moment when Michael Corleone tells his brother Fredo to "never take sides against the family". Today, The Senator took sides against the family.

Today, John F. Kerry became John "Fredo" Kerry, and our world is poorer for it. At at time when our world is struggling to survive, the Senator put his own interests ahead of the interests of the country and the world. By saying what he said and the way he said it he's become a smaller man as every day goes by. Every interview, every chance to be a bigger man he's instead shown us all what a small petty creature he is. This could've been an election that showed the world the best in our country , two political parties in open debate both with positive visions of the world to be. Instead, one party openly hopes for failure of the economy, failure of armed services, failure and defeat at every turn. The people who belong to that party are so deep in hate that to show any signs of happiness or joy is seen as potentially being "good for Bush" and thus must be stopped. Shhhh, dont talk about that, It would be good for Bush...

The Senator could stop all of it, he could inspire all of us, but instead he bathes in it. Worse still, he thrives on it. He could do so much, but instead has chosen to do so little. But worse of all, he's chosen to go against the family.

In my opinion, There are a great number of people in the world who dont like Mr. Bush, but I believe there are a great number of people who do respect him. Some out of fear, some out of admiration, some even out of inspiration. I also think there are a great number of people who do like Senator Kerry, but don't actually respect him. They certainly don't fear him, I doubt that even people in his own State admire him and I have yet to find anyone who has been inspired by him.

"Fredo" does not get to lead the family. Despite his best hopes, The Don knew this would be the case.

Posted @ September 23, 2004 11:43 PM | Kerry File | Comments (8)

My Guess is Hale-Bopp Is Coming Back Early.

So, first I hear that Joe Lockhart is joining the Kerry team as a communication director.

Then Kerry says this, and I think " Hey wait a minute, I think I've smelled that kind of bizarre, pointless, circular logic "coast-to-coast AM" driven claptrap from an aged and neutered cult leader once before".

and then I remembered this guy:

and it all came together. I guess this means I have to wheel the telescope out again.

Posted @ September 22, 2004 09:06 PM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

Meanwhile, Back at DNC HQ...

Now try to remember when you read this, that according to Mickey Kaus and Kevin Drum, the "memogate affair" is supposed to be having a "net negative" effect on the Bush campaign.

Well for Kerrys sake Let's hope so, because at this rate, my "40 states for Bush" prediction is looking a wee bit on the light side! Be aware that many of the States that Bush is up in are States where Bush hasnt spent a dime or visited even once. And remember, Bush is a marathon runner, Bush likes competition, he thrives on it, he looooooves it when you misunderestimate him.

Those of you still working under the belief that "bush is stupid", let me try to explain something to you. There's a game that people play in the south; its called "I'm a big dumb hick". The way it works is you come from out of town , you meet someone who starts the game by acting like a "big dumb hick" you naturally assume you are superior and can take advantage of "Poor Joe Hick" and naturally you let you guard down. At the worst possible time, and the worst possible moment the "big dumb hick " game comes to an end when the person you previously thought to be an extra from "Mayberry RFD", turns out to be the freakin' MBA from Harvard, and suddenly those jokes about inbreeding don't seem quite so funny. You walk away from the game feeling like you got hit in the crotch with a cricket bat.

( Which, approximates the way I think that Democrats will feel on November 3rd. )

After years of working as a software consultant in the south, I learned that when someone starts playing "big dumb hick" , you put your hand on your wallet, keep your back to the wall and make sure you got two ways out of every room you enter with "Joe Hick". My travels in the south taught me that the only dumb people in the South were actually people from the North.

Has it occured to anyone else that the generation that lost Vietnam the first time is now in the process of metaphysically losing it a second time? Was there something in the water when the "greatest generation" came home to breed that helped produce a generation of narcissistic, whiny pathetic and perpetual losers? Is this the true effect of flouridation? I thank God every day I'm not a "baby boomer". Jeezus! do these people need to get over themselves. My only real sadness is I have to listen to them whine and kvetch all the way to their sunshine years, all the while complaining about how awful life has been for them. Hey thanks guys. Thanks for all you left behind for my generation. What a swell bunch of whack jobs you turned out to be.

Only a pack of self-involved idiots would actually think that they should base their whole campaign for executive office on the world that existed 35 years ago. What makes the unibrowed morons at the DNC think anyone can relate to a candidate who's best days occured before refrigerators had the autodefrost feature?

Good Gracious people! Didn't Bill Clinton teach you anything? You had eight years to learn how to work in the modern world. He tried to warn you. He tried to show you. He begged you to listen. Hell, he even called Kerry personally and said "SHUT UP ABOUT VIETNAM, YOU FREAKIN' ANOREXIC SCARECROW...". Did Kerry listen? nope, why? Because like everyone in that generation, you can't tell them anything. They know better, you just wait, they'll show you! ( one tin soldier rides awaaaaayyyyy....)

Bill Clinton looks positively statesman-like by comparison to this pack of morons, and thats really saying something. It's no surprise to me at all that Bill is MIA this year. Who wants to associate themselves with people who "overpromise and underdeliver" year after year after year.

If theres just one reason I want Bush to win, it's so I wont have to hear the word Vietnam ever again. Believe me, I've had my fill over my lifetime of "Fill-in-the-blank-place is just like Vietnam". I think if more people had known we were going to winge and whinny about that freakin place over a whole freakin lifetime, they probably would have said we should have kept fighting it.

You know what I really, really hate about the Kerry 2004 Campaign? It completely ruined one of my favorite movies. I can no longer watch Apocalypse Now anymore without thinking of Kerry.

That's-just-not-fair...

Posted @ September 15, 2004 11:46 PM | Kerry File | Comments (12)

If the media was really "fair and balanced"

Today's headline:

Kennedy to Hit Campaign Trail for Kerry
Should Read:
Aged and Infirmed Killer Of Campaign Staff Reported to be "on the road again".

How do you know when you are losing? when you actually think that Teddy is an asset instead of an embarrasment. Perhaps he's just waiting for Jimmy Carter to clear his calendar to help with the foreign policy weaknesses.

Posted @ September 14, 2004 05:02 PM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

Summary Analysis of John Kerry's "The New War"

In nine chapters and 168 pages from John Kerry himself about the world of international crime and terror. The book "The New War"

Ladies and Gentleman of the Blogosphere, I sacrifice my own eyes to keep each of you from going out to buy and read this book on your own. It's a small book, and with the help of this "Summary" you can glean most of what is needed in about 15 minutes from any bookshelf at any library or bookstore where you can find it. Abbie Hoffman, eat your heart out.

Mark Twain once offered an analysis of another book where he called the it "cholorform in print"**. I always thought that was a good line, so I will use it here as its best approximates the effect this book has upon large mammals like myself. This is one tough book to read, if you read it with John Kerrys 'Boston Foghorn" voice as your inner dialog, it could probably be used at Guantanamo to break Taliban detainees.

Senators often suffer the affliction of 'Senator-itis' where they feel free to pontificate in their own voice how they would run the world if they were in charge. This book is poorly written, poorly edited and almost never gets to the point. Kerrys book is long on "tsk-tsk" and short on action, perhaps that alone can serve as the best summation of Mr Kerrys long, yet dull, career.

Kerrys Book, "the New War" is the lawyer or accountants version of Sun Tzus or Clausewitz' treatise on war. Mr. Kerry feels that with enough paperwork and enough lawyers, international criminal elements and their little brothers, the terrorists, can be dealt with in a civilized fashion. There is no discussion given to law enforcement, or perhaps even police action or dare I say, War, as a way of putting the nefarious criminals in check.

What follows is a chapter by chapter breakdown of the book:

Dedicated to his mother and father, and daughters with the words:

“ …who taught me to look beyond our shores and in all directions”

Really. It sounds like an SNL sketch, but you can’t make that stuff up. I’m sure it doesn’t sound so pompous in the original French dialect, but in English it sounds pretty thankless and soulless at the same time.

Chapter 1 – Darkness Visible

Summary: Capitalizing on his former Criminal Prosecutor role, Kerry tells how crime has become an international enterprise requiring an international response. To deal with the problem, America must retool itself to meet this challenge by confronting its bigotry and biases at home and in some cases, must give up some of its freedoms and liberties. Kerry equates international criminal enterprises with the forces of fascism in World War II.

Money quotes:

Paragraph 2; page 32:
“America must lead an international crusade, rallying together domestically on a bipartisan basis. We must recover our courage and moral vision”.

Last paragraph of page 32 :
“In forging in international alliance against crime, Americans will have to confront some of our most dangerous domestic demons: race, poverty, street crime and the often inflammatory politics that surround them. We will have to wrestle with issues that challenge our deepest beliefs about our constitutional freedoms and our appropriate international role. But success in those struggles will only make us all the more fit to lead the world into war against the sworn enemies of civilized law and human liberty.”

Thoughts:

Kerry makes every effort to equivocate the actions of the Maoist Shining Path with the “Montana freeman” as if they were anywhere in the same league. The “I,I,I,Me,Me,Mine” meme continues unabated in this chapter. There is no mention of al-queda. One mention of Saddam Hussein, but only as a dismissive throwaway line on page 32. Kerry uses the term “we” almost as an invective, such as “you there, peasant, get off my lawn…”.

Chapter 2 – Hijacking the Russian bear

Summary: While Communist, Russia was certainly a bad country, but now that it’s free of Communism, its worse off than before, and what’s worse, it’s all our fault. Apparently, Reagan didn’t have a plan to win the peace after the cold war (the old fool….). Russia is now the center of a large criminal enterprise, one that we have been lax in paying attention to, and again, it’s all our fault.

Money quotes:

Page 50 “As an example of our failure to treat the globalization of crime with appropriate seriousness, it took until 1994 for the FBI to open an office in Moscow”

Page 50 “ The greatest danger to us comes from the damage that crime can do to the Russian economy and therefore its stability and fight for democracy’

Thoughts:
If you read this chapter and replace the word “Russia” with Iraq, you make the best case for the Iraq Theatre of operation in the Jihadi War. I don’t want to be overly harsh, but the man seems almost nostalgic for the control that communism provided.

Chapter 3 – China on the Brink

Summary: China while still remaining true to the holy church of communism is every bit as big a threat as is Russia, due mostly to our incompetence in dealing with them. China is teetering on the edge of being a criminal enterprise, and we have done nothing to stop it from becoming one.

A theme is starting to evolve within the book:

"It's all your fault - and only I can save you from yourself!"

Money quotes:

Page 69 “Nobody knows what Chinas future will bring. China is veiled by our ignorance, by it’s own preference for secrecy and discretion and by its sheer numbers. There are too many people, too many factors in the equation for anyone to fathom. China has to be a mystery even to itself.

Thoughts:
If I were his editor, I would have cut this chapter. I think its here to pad the book out to a respectable page count. Very little is said, and the kidney trade story is, well, odd in light of the subject matter of world terrorism.

Chapter 4 – Who Stole Colombia?

Summary: Colombia is not really a country but a drug cartel wrapped inside the protection of an internationally recognized sovereign state. Again, Kerry makes the case for why sovereignty should not offer protection from international law. Yet, who does Kerry blame? That’s right, you and me, compadre.

Money quotes:

Page 75: Get this! Kerry quotes himself! , Kerry quotes himself taking testimony in the Pablo Escobar hearings. This is like George Costanza talking about himself in the third person.
Page 78: Kerry makes a great case for the Patriot act by describing in detail how easy it is to avoid phone taps. Kerry blames Radio Shack.(Hey, Tandy Corp is based in Texas….)

“ …And having pointed out that Colombia is on the State Department’s list of top twenty money-laundering countries, I would be unfair not to mention that the United States also belongs to that elite club”

Thoughts:
On the closing paragraph in this chapter, Kerry again unintentionally makes the case for Iraq:

“ Democracy is a rare and recent development in human history; the world can ill afford to lose a single one. In Columbia, crime has killed democracy by turning it into a grotesque and humiliating parody of itself. “ The whole paragraph maks the clearest case yet for action in Iraq. If I were doing opposition research for the Bush campaign, I would be sure that this was noted and used in the debates.
Chapter 5 – Reengineering the Drug trade

Summary: The Drug trade, aided by NAFTA/GATT and other international trade agreements is worse than any war in Americas history, and our political class with their insistence on so called ‘free trade’. Oh, and by the way, its all your fault, peasant.

Money quotes:

Page 98 “Prime Minister Bhutto herself was forced out of office by Pakistans president who charged her with corruption, temporarily leaving no one even nominally in control of Pakistan. This is the kind of political vacuum made for exploitation by drug traffickers and terrorists as well”

Page 108“But aren’t there any positive effects of drug money on a nations economy?”

Thoughts:
Standard “War on drugs” boilerplate. It’s hard to disagree with something when it says essentially nothing of value or anything requireing any action. It's like someone writing 10 pages on how all babies should be fed and not go hungry, yet offer no plans on how to get food to the mothers of the babies. His biggest issue with the Taliban seems to be their part in illicit drug trade, no mention of their role in the obliteration of the rights of the women of Afghanistan.

Chapter 6 – The Globalization of terror

Summary: Aided by our recent trade agreements with NAFTA and GANNT, the world of terror is at our footsteps. Alothough I voted for both, I know that they will bite us later. Terrorists are everywhere, not just overseas, and some of them are driven by their hatred of the West. The Unabomber is driven by the way that modern life is not as nice as it could be.

Money quotes:

Page 122-123 - Quoting Ted Kaczynski “ The Industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race…”. Indeed there is a general sense of displeasure with technology that accompanies its obvious benefits”.

Thoughts:
This chapter is in fact the core of the book. If you are going to the library to skim read this pontificating tome, this is the only chapter worth reading. However, his argument is layered on the back of the idea that global crime enterprises, which are really just an extension of normal business corporations are the real enemy, not terrorists per se. Terrorists are just another flavor of ice cream in the freezer of John Kerrys mind.

Chapter 7 – Human Contraband

Summary: Apparently, Mr. Kerry has detected that there are many people who regularly flout our border controls to enter the country illegally. As a resident of California, I concur Mr. Kerry.

Money quotes:
None.

Thoughts:
If Kerry wanted to win the election, this chapter would serve as the centerpiece for the campaign. Its clear, cogent and direct. My guess is someone else wrote it.

Chapter 8 – Where Dirty money washes up

Summary: Kerry makes his role in the fall of BCCI a center stage case for international banking regulation. Noriega and Oliver North serve as the authors protagonists in this tale on international intrigue.

Money quotes:

Page 151 Willie Sutton robbed banks because “that’s where the money was” . Oh Wit!, thy name is 'Kerry'.

Thoughts:
Throughout this chapter Kerry says in some form of the following quote “ …a painful example of how transnational criminals inevitably erode a nations sovereignty, jeopardize its security and even threaten its very sense and definition of identity". Given that Kerry is constantly telling us that our main duty is to work with other countries as allies, he seems to have forgotten that very often the other countries have been compromised by the forces that are trying to kill us.

Chapter 9 – A vision of victory

Summary: Kerry says that there are essentially three strategies to take in the new war, Multilateral, Bilateral, and oh heaven forbid, Unilateral. In all three cases, Kerry calls upon a completely new set of international conventions to deal with the problems he’s has outlined in the book.
He advocates strategies such as making money laundering an international criminal crime. Well golly, I sure wished we had thought of that. Why sure, make it illegal, why couldnt we see that before!

This last chapter is painful to read. In the rest of the book, Kerry repeatedly points out the failures of countries to deal with the low level types of problems with international crime. The fact that a countries sovereignty is often used a shield for nefarious activities by criminal gangs is an obvious problem. Yet, in Kerrys proposed solutions he repeatedly points out that “we, nor should anyone else be made to give up sovereignty”. I think he believes that by the time anyone gets to this point of the book, they are likely not awake anyway to offer any objections to his case.

His solutions take the form of written agreements between sovereign states that agree to behave to a global canon of ethics. Yet, Kerry has spent 8 Chapters outlining the failure of just such an existing structure. He seems to think that the problem is that all previous international law was simply poorly worded, and if he and his crack legal team were able to get rid of all the partisan "democracy" fol-der-ol, why he'd have the world running better in no time at all.

Money quotes:

“in a globalized world, our national security is only as strong as the weakest link” (Get thee to an editor, sir!)

Page 186“In 1994 I went to President Clinton and we agreed it was essential to put 100,000 more cops on U.S. streets within five years.

Page 173 “Obviously, the United States cannot go it alone” – referring to the “war on international crime and drug trafficking ”

Page 189 “Going abroad is not the only solution, of course. We need to get our own house in order. Legislators must join the executive and judicial branches of government in revising laws and reconfiguring relevant agencies to strengthen our response to the complex, multidimensional nature of global crime today.” – Apparently, Kerry was for the patriot act before it was even proposed.

Items stated in the book that require further research
( To Your Horses Fellow pajama clad Blog demons!):

1. Kerry makes the statement that he ran the criminal division of the DA’s office in Middlesex County Massachusetts(page 17). What did he do? and what was his record?

2. Kerry says he had a role to play in the prosecution of Howie Winter of the Winter Hill gang (page 17). Really? what was the role, and what is the concensus of the legal community on this case.

3. Kerry says in 1987, “my work shut down BCCI, and in the process I uncovered the bad guys”(page 18) . BCCI was a big stinkburger of a case, I'll bet you theres more than one grub under this bit of debris. I do remember that Kerry took quite a bit of heat from other Democrats for his calling the venerated "Clark Clifford" up to testify.

4. Kerry makes a big stink about Chinas trade in Human Kidneys and other Human body organs. I have head these stories before, but I always attributed them to nacent western racism or urban legends. (pages 65-69)

5. He states that crack cocaine is named for the sound the cocaine crystals make as they burn. ( page 106)
6. On Page 96, He states that Taliban took power in 1996. Did Kerry ever once give any speech about the Taliban and its takeover in Afghanistan?

** - I am aware of the book he reviewed for that quote on. I would not take it too personally, as Mr. Clemens was hard on the entire human race, and not just those of the faith. I personally think he was a bit too harsh. but it was a good line and deserved the best of all compliments and that is to be borrowed for use elsewhere.

CORRECTED: Columbia changed to the correct "Colombia". Thanks Rich.

Posted @ September 12, 2004 11:06 PM | Kerry File | Comments (4)

Kerry Book "The New War" II - First A-HA!

I'm busy chasing down all sorts of things as a result of the first read through of "The New War". But in the first of what are sure to be many A-HA'S! I found this.

Money quote:
During this period, Kerry was linked romantically with several Hollywood starlets, including Morgan Fairchild

John Kerry vis a vis Tommy Flanagan?

Ever seen Jon Lovitz in the same place as Kerry? Coincidence? I think not!

I'm punchy. Theres a days worth of googling to do on the details found in this book.

UPDATE: Kerry mentioned his book, traffic comes a flyin. Heres the finished piece

Posted @ September 10, 2004 11:28 PM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

Kerry Book "The New War" I - First Pass

What I've learned so far.

One of the weirdest things about whats been going on lately has been why the Kerry campaign has been using, of all people, Senator Tom Harkin as a mouthpiece to speak for Kerrys military experience. This is really, really odd to me, given that Harkins own military record is a model for how not to take credit for something you didn't do. Senator Harkin has taken credit for things he simply and completely did not do as part of his military record, this is not partisan rhetoric, his own party denounced his proclamiations of service in Vietnam, when he was in fact nowhere near the place.

Yet, despite Kerry under a barrage of accusations for doing very similar things, the Kerry campaign is using the said same Senator Harkin to vouch for Kerry veracity.

Why?

Well, in my reading of Kerrys book "the New War', I discovered that Mr. Kerry and Mr. Harkin have been collaborative partners for some time.

On April 15th 1985, newly elected Senator Kerry and Senator Tom Harkin went to Nicaragua to meet with Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega.

I'm putting together a timeline for how these two have worked together and what they have worked on. In light of the rather surprising turn that history brought us with the fall of communism, just 7 years after this fateful visit, It does not look good for either Mr. Harkin or Mr. Kerry to have made such a bet for a losing side.

This is just one crouton in a whole salad bar of tasty, crunchy goog-able facts. And it's all in Kerrys own words. Theres good and bad in that of course. First, as I said before, Kerry starts nearly every sentence with the word I. He rarely if ever says " We in the senate' or even "We Democrats", it's 194 pages of "I,I,I, Me, Me, Mine". If he does reference someone else, it is only to bask in their reflected glory.

Look, this book is like the La Brea tar pits. Its a historical repository that represents all that John Kerry thinks about in terms of the world as whole and the world of terrorism.

I think this book and the things Kerry talks about and the conclusions he draws in it are why we are all talking about Vietnam. The Vietnam thing from Kerry is like a magicians misdirection, watch the right hand while the left is moving the card to another location.

However, unlike his views on Vietnam, theres no excusing some of the things I see in here as part of the 'angry young man,betrayed by his country ' meme, but this is all very recent stuff by comparison, this book was written in 1997, this is not the heady days of the early 1970's we are talking about. Kerry is an adult at this point and has dropped the snot-nosed patrician Boston accent. I also recognize alot of what I see in here as reflections of things I read in "The Star Spangled Mirror" by his father Richard Kerry. It will be interesting to go back and do a line by line comparison.

One other thing of note. Al Qeada, Osama Bin Laden are not mentioned anywhere in the book. This book was also written prior to the release of both Pakistan and India into the "Nuclear Club", something I consider one of the key failures of the Clinton Administration.

UPDATE: Since Kerry Decided to mention his book, traffic to this piece has gone up. Heres the final link to the finished review.

Posted @ September 10, 2004 08:48 PM | Kerry File | Comments (1)

Breaking My ' No Kerry ' Pledge

Today, I found a copy of a book written by Kerry in 1997 - The New War.. It is a book on terrorists. Imagine that, A book on terrorism that Kerry wrote well in advance of 9/11 and I haven't heard a word about it.

Now, The last time I read a book that involved Kerry, I snapped and wrote the "Farewell John Kerry' piece. I haven't heard of this book before, nor have I heard anyone from inside or outside the Kerry camp comment on how 'in 1997 I said in my book: the new war "blah,blah,blah..." This gets my interest up. I wonder if the whole Vietnam riff is just a smokescreen to cover up some really dumb things that he may have said about the 'war on terror'.

So I will break my pledge for this effort only and provide a breakdown of what the book has to say.

Blog entry to follow as soon as I read to completion.

Update I: In the preface , page 1, sentence 2 - He mentions that he was in Vietnam. Unbelievable. I'm begining to wonder if this is going to be a book level fisking. The hardest part of reading this is trying to keep his monotonous voice out of my inner dialog while I'm reading it. I will try to channel Richard Kiley or Charlton Heston( or maybe Jacques Cousteau...).

Update II: Oh good lord. It's worse than I thought.

RED ALERT: THIS IS A BOOK LEVEL FISKING UNDERWAY
194 pages. The word "I" starts almost every sentence. pray for me.

Posted @ September 10, 2004 03:48 PM | Kerry File | Comments (1)

Japan "Surrenders" : Candidate Asks "Where is the plan for Peace?

Japan Surrenders To Allies, Signs Rigid Terms On Warship; Truman Sets Today As V-J Day

After yesterday's recognition of the beginning of World War II, it is now only fair to match it with the announcement of end the war, September 2, 1945 but viewed through the lens of the politics of today.

Our Time Travelling candidate visits the past to provide a op-ed piece for the NY Times.

The original New York Times Page is found below

...SNIP.. "Of course it must be said at the beginning that we question the "timing" of the release of this information as it only serves to bolster the unproven and unilateral case that war can ever be for a 'good cause'. Each citizen of this great democracy should wonder aloud "where is the plan to win the peace"? The Japanese, a country who's culture is much older and wiser than our own, were under the control of a dictatorship and while we applaud the removal of that brutal regime, we cannot deny that the actions of President Theodore Roosevelt in 1908 helped keep that regime in place. Yet, the current "selected but not elected" Presidents actions have only punished the people of the great and diverse land.

I wonder if President Truman understands how "haughty" he sounds when he insists as many of his neo-con pro-business cabinet in insisting that Japan submit to our definition of "Democracy". President Truman has gone so far as to propose the establishment of rights for women and for the formation of unions within a constitution which we will write for the Japanese. These concepts are foreign to the Japanese and had the president ever travelled beyond the borders of his midwestern state, he would be aware of the worlds beautiful mosaic. It is with great shame that our country should be a part of such a blantant case of cultural imperialism.

It is foolish for the United States to believe it can force Democracy on to a culture at the end of a gun. It will only feed the hatred that the Asiatics have felt towards America. It was precisely this anger that lead to Pearl Harbor. How many more "Pearl Harbors" is Mr. Turman creating by his 'go it alone' approach in Japan?

While we certainly "support the troops", we cannot help but recognize the fraudulent coalition inolved with the illegal occupation of Japan does not include our stongest and most important allies, The Soviet Union, who's sacrifices in this war far outweigh those of our own. While President Truman says that this is the "United Nations", it is in fact a coalition lead by largely colonial powers who's only desire it is to secure the resources of the fallen empires for the use of the multinational corporatations , such as Michelin and Bayer and of course, "General" Motors and the anti-union Ford Corporation.

While the President may disagree with the protestors cry of "No Blood for Soy" , he cannot deny the anger that all thinking Americans feel towards him and his middle American upbringing. While the President has guided the Armed forces of the United States, over 45,000 men have died in places like Okinawa. Okinawa did not attack Pearl Harbor, and has no direct linkage to the so called "war against fascism" yet the poor people of Okinawa have been made to pay the price for our ignorant polices. While 'League of Nations' inspectors were kicked out of Pacific waters during the 1920's, the inspectors were able to verify that there were no "naval bases" in the Ryukyu islands. President Truman must answer why if the reason for invading Okinawa was to remove it as a base for the already defeated forces of Japan, why if not a single Japanese carrier was found in the waters around Okinawa.

The world awaits his answer.

The real question this country must ask is "where is the plan to win the peace"? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for the occupation of Japan?

We strongly urge the President to remove all American troops from Asia with all due haste as our occupation of the holy cities of Kyoto, and Tokyo will only inflame the growning insurgency against our troops."

....SNIP

Update: Just so everyones clear, the first part of this piece is a parody, the second part that follows is the actual history. The first part is a reflection of the knee-jerk prefabricated intention of the "candidate" to take history and spin it towards disaster. This is a new phenomenon, at least at the scale that it is being played today. What is interesting is how much of what I wrote is actually being said today by supposedly responsible people in regards to the current world situation.

The biggest mistake we make today is assuming that the challenges of the past were easy and guaranteed of success. They were not. Japan has a dozen alternate histories, all much worse for the world. Japan ( and Germany) are models for the world on how the embrace of liberty can have a transforming effect on nations of the world, and thus the betterment of all mankind.

On a sunny day in 1945, the "second half" of the world war which began in 1914, came to an end.

New York Times : Front Page Sept 2. 1945.
Sunday, Sept. 2--Japan surrendered formally and unconditionally to the Allies today in a twenty-minute ceremony which ended just as the sun burst through low-hanging clouds as a shining symbol to a ravaged world now done with war. Twelve signatures, requiring only a few minutes to inscribe on the articles of surrender, ended the bloody Pacific conflict.

On behalf of Emperor Hirohito, Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu signed for the Government and Gen. Yoshijiro Umezu for the Imperial General Staff.

MacArthur Voices Peace Hope

Gen. Douglas MacArthur then accepted in behalf of the United Nations, declaring:

"It is my earnest hope and indeed the hope of all mankind that from this solemn occasion a better world shall emerge out of the blood and carnage of the past." One by one the Allied representatives stepped forward and signed the document that blighted Japan's dream of empire built on bloodshed and tyranny.

First was Admiral Chester W. Nimitz for the United States, then the representatives of China, the United Kingdom, the Soviet, Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands and New Zealand. The flags of the United States, Britain, the Soviet and China fluttered from the veranda deck of the famed superdreadnaught, polished and scrubbed as never before. More than 100 high-ranking military and naval officers watched.

Pledges Justice and Tolerance

"As Supreme Commander for the Allied powers," General MacArthur told the Japanese, "I announce it my firm purpose, in the tradition of the countries I represent, to proceed in the discharge of my responsibilities with justice and tolerance, while taking all necessary dispositions to insure that the terms of surrender are fully, promptly and faithfully complied with."

All through this dramatic half hour, only those aboard the battleship knew of what was taking place, because the Missouri has no broadcasting facilities. But recordings were rushed to the near-by communications ship Ancon, and the solemn words of General MacArthur beginning the ceremony--"We are gathered here, representatives of the major warring powers"--were flashed around the world.

The Japanese representatives were present at the command of Emperor Hirohito contained in a proclamation issued by order of the Supreme Allied Commander. The Emperor further commanded his officials "to issue general order to the military and naval forces in accordance with the direction of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers." The Imperial General Headquarters issued the order later.

Thus Emperor Hirohito formally acknowledged that General MacArthur's word in Japan would come foremost of all Japanese officialdom during the Allies' occupation of the country, which never before had been occupied by an alien force."I command all my people forthwith to cease hostilities," the Emperor said, "to lay down their arms and faithfully to carry out all the provisions of the instrument of surrender and the general orders issued by the Imperial General Headquarters hereunder."

All issues have been "determined on the battlefields of the world and hence are not for our discussion or debate," General MacArthur said before he invited all representatives to sign the surrender instrument.
"Nor is it for us here to meet, representing as we do the majority of the peoples of the earth, in a spirit of distrust, malice or hatred," he added. "But rather it is for us, both victors and vanquished, to rise to that higher dignity which alone benefits the sacred purposes we are about to serve. * * *"

General MacArthur and Admiral Nimitz paid deep tribute to Allied dead and to the people of all Allied nations whose blood, work and sacrifices helped bring victory. Admiral Nimitz said he took "great pride in the American forces which have helped to win this victory," and declared that "America can be proud of them."

"The officers and men of the United States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine who fought in the Pacific have written heroic new chapters in this nation's military history," Admiral Nimitz said. "I have infinite respect for their courage, resourcefulness and devotion to duty. We also acknowledge the great contribution to this victory made by our valiant allies. United we fought and united we prevail."

Admiral Nimitz observed that "the long and bitter struggle, which Japan started so treacherously on the seventh of December, 1941," was at an end.

Recalls Our Dark Days

General MacArthur touched obliquely on the bitter days of the early Philippine fighting when he said:

"As I look back on the long, tortuous trail from those grim days of Bataan and Corregidor, when an entire world lived in fear, when democracy was on the defensive everywhere, when modern civilization trembled in the balance, I thank a merciful God that He has given us the faith, the courage and the power from which to mould victory." General MacArthur told of the Allies' plans to help Japan take her place among peaceful nations.

The Japanese used the knowledge gained from Western science to forge "an instrument of oppression and human enslavement," he said. Freedom of expression, action and thought were denied the Japanese through "application of force," he declared.

"We are committed by the Potsdam Declaration of principles to see that the Japanese people are liberated from this condition of slavery," the Allied leader declared. "It is my purpose to implement this commitment just as rapidly as the armed forces are demobilized and other essential steps taken to neutralize the war potential." He declared that "if the talents of the race are turned into constructive channels the country can lift itself from its present deplorable state into a position of dignity." General MacArthur said that "in Asia as well as in Europe unshackled peoples are tasting the full sweetness of liberty," and asserted that "in the Philippines America has evolved a model for this new free world of Asia." The United States granted the Philippines commonwealth status more than a decade ago, and the islands will in time become completely independent under an act of Congress."In the Philippines, America has demonstrated that peoples of the East and peoples of the West may walk side by side in mutual respect and with mutual benefit," the general said. "The history of our sovereignty there has now the full confidence of the East."

Posted @ September 02, 2004 02:55 PM | Kerry File | Comments (1)

Life Magazine: Summer 1972

I've just spent some time reading through the summer of 1972 in old copies of Life magazine.
First issue - August 25 1972. Republican First Lady Pat Nixon on the cover.
Second Issue September 15th 1972 - Israeli kidnappings and murder an the Munich Olympics.

According to these magazines, Summer of 1972 we had :

Olympics (Munich - "West" Germany)

A Controversial incumbent republican president (Nixon) running for re-election against war hero liberal democrat.(Mcgovern)

War (Vietnam)

How many pages do you think are dedicated to the war in both issues of this magazine? How many pages are dedicated to the wild eyed hatred of the Americans overseas? How many talk about Nixon in terms of "hitler-like"?

This is 150 huge pages of journalism, written by the cream of the liberal media crop at the top of their game.

come on, just take a guess......

Just 4. One article by Ramsey Clark on our bombing of the North Vietnamese, on reading the article its clear that Mr. Clark never visted Dresden, he seems to think that "bombers" is just a great nickname for a Kansas City Womens Professional Roller Derby team. He seems genuinely surprised to find that when a squadron of B-52 salvoes its payload, that things break and people die for miles around. There is a minor mention in one article about the hip new talk show called "The Dick Cavett show" that talks about how a somewhat lesser known character, known as a "Mr. Kerry" being taken apart by 'his enemies' on the show( gee, I wonder how that all turned out?). In the September 15th issue the only "letters to the editor' that discuss the war are in response to the "Ramsey Clark" article.

Thats it, Vietnam, the most controversial war of all time rates just four pages, in two issues at the very time its being fought.

How is it that the Vietnam war seems to be getting more press in 2004, than it was getting in 1972?

Update: Further analysis of these magazine issues also has revealed that based on the advertising levels seen within them - that Americans of 1972 drank only the hardest of alcohol, smoke cigarettes like chimneys, drive only really big cars made exclusively in some place called "Detroit". There are also repeated references to a device known as a 'record player' and a "hi-fi", which seem to be very popular, although their exact purpose seems to be lost in the mists of time.

Posted @ August 29, 2004 02:38 PM | Kerry File | Comments (3)

Kerry on Kerry: The New Soldier

Here, for as long as it lasts, is a PDF version of John Kerry's "New Soldier".

I'm now looking for John Kerry's dads book. John Kerry's dad was a foreign service officer who wrote a book about "what we should do". It will make an interesting read.

Posted @ August 25, 2004 01:59 PM | Kerry File | Comments (2)

10 Second Summary

"What John Kerry is saying in essence is that "in Vietnam, I was a hero, but I was surrounded by war criminals."

John Kerry’s Two Vietnams: Macubin Thomas Owens - National Review Online

I think that sums the situation up nicely.

Update: Best quote heard all day: "John Kerry's got his foot stuck way down inside a full spittoon, and danged if he aint a gonna get chaw all over the place getting it out and end up lookin like a damn fool doin it too!"

Will Rogers - eat your heart out.

Posted @ August 23, 2004 10:30 AM | Kerry File | Comments (0)

John F. Kerry: "Just Another Goofy Ensign"

From Navy Captain Kelly, former Executive Officer of the USS Gridley comes this view into the three paragraph naval career of John F. Kerry, prior to his time in the Swift Boats.

In this testimonial, you'll find several refutations of the story given about Kerry by Douglas Brinkley in the book TOUR OF DUTY.

My favorite bit:

"That is not to say that Kerry was not a good officer. He was and to my recollection was well liked. Did he stalk the passageways showing his future presidential timber? Absolutely not. A reporter from the Chicago Tribune actually asked me that. When I told him that he was just another goofy Ensign, he was horrified and did not use that quote."

My guess is that this assessment, is probably the most accurate to use in the assessment of the true nature of the future Junior Senator of Massachusetts. I don't consider it that negative or an outright indictment of the man, its just a simple straightforward way to describe an average man in average circumstances. Let's remember, its not whether or not he served that is at issue, its the way he seems to have inflated a rather average experience into that of a modern day Sea-going Audie Murphy.

It is incredible to me that we are talking about the Vietnam war today, a full 6 wars ago.

Vietnam was

A war fought when Color Television was still a novelty.

When aircraft crossing the Pacific did not have wide range navigation aids and still relied on sextants.

When the words "via satellite" appeared at the bottom of your TV screen, you said "wow".

When TV news was restricted to 30 minutes per day, and presented as simply being read by the likes of Douglas Edwards or Walter Cronkite with just a simple picture displayed behind them.

When most cities had atleast two newspapers, each of a different political stripe, delivered in the morning and afternoon allowing the average citizen to get a wide variety of opinion on the news.

Computers filled entire buildings, and "terminals" were teletype devices with rolls of paper for displays.

40% of Americans didn't even own a clothes dryer, but used "clothes lines" instead.

Long distance phone calls were so expensive, that it was a major breach in manners to use someones phone for a long distance call.

It was - a war fought a very long time ago, in a world that hardly even exists anymore. So why are we talking about it today? We are talking about it today because to talk about anything else is to begin examine the record of the man the Democrats have nominated to run the worlds preeminent superpower in the midst of mankinds most recent, most desparate struggle for survival.

The Democrats have nominated a man who since Vietnam has remained consistently on the wrong side of history. That nomination is an indictment of everything that is wrong with the Democrat party.

They have chosen at this crucial turning point in history:

A man who slandered the men whom he fought with, who were still fighting,even imprisoned in Vietnam on his return to the US.

A man who supported the cause of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

A man who after the invasion and subjugation of Kuwait, perferred that we do nothing in their defense.

If Senator Kerry is lucky, we will talk about Vietnam until election day. Kerrys "semester in Vietnam" is acting as a shield for the Senators horrific record in the past 35 years. It is his only grappling hook on the cliff of legitimacy. If we begin to talk about anything else, Kerry will be exposed as the weak candidate who was getting his patrician ass handed to him by Howard Dean, not 9 months ago. If the election were about anything else but the existance of a military record, no matter how wafer thin it may be, Howard Dean would be in this fight, and if I may add, He would have done a lot better the how John F. Kerry will do.

John F. Kerrys military record appears to me to resemble that of LBJ and not the other JFK as he would imply.

As I said on Vodkapundit theres really only one more question to answer in this election "When Bush wins, Will the NY Times bother to cover the story"?

Posted @ August 20, 2004 10:16 PM | Kerry File | Comments (4)

Ever feel like you're caught in a loop?

Take a look at this, and see if you can read my mind.

Is the Silver Star the military equivalent to the SI curse?

Posted @ August 18, 2004 10:44 AM | Kerry File | Comments (0)