November 09, 2003

John Kerry is a [word which I got tired of Freeper types doing Google searches for and thus finding this page]

Well, but why single out John Kerry? Why not John Edwards, too? And most of the other Democratic nominees? I mean, they all piled on Howard Dean for his ostensibly controversial "Confederate flag" comment. (Try this link if you're not registered at the New York Times.) And right on to Dean for not being a wuss and sticking to his guns, instead of trotting out the usual pro forma mea culpas. (Ooh, aren't I the smart one, with my two Latin phrases in a row.)

But that's old news. Now I have a new reason to be pissed off at (most of) the other Democratic nominees, and that's their entirely predictable reaction to Howard Dean's decision to opt out of public financing. I mean, getting all "Dean abandoned his earlier pledge never to bypass the public financing system" (from Lieberman, who can drop out of this race any time he wants) conveniently ignores that Dean's supporters voted on whether this was something he should do or not, and that Dean wasn't the guy who screwed the system up by opting out in the first place -- that would be Bush, who is the guy we're all trying to beat, remember? I would like every candidate to repeat after me: "It doesn't matter if I'm nominated; it only matters that Bush loses."

Oh, but John Kerry. "It's disappointing that Howard Dean so conveniently abandoned a long-held position of principle out of mere political expediency," he says. I guess Kerry would know about that, what with voting yes on going to war with Iraq and then acting like he knew all along it was a bad idea. Hey, Kerry, maybe if you "preferred that the United States pursue more diplomacy before the war", you should have waited until that happened before voting to give a crazy man a loaded gun.

It's also galling that Kerry is taking another desperate opportunity to bring Dean down over the campaign finance thing when he's considering doing the same thing himself. Come on, man. You've run for president plenty of times. Don't you think if anyone was actually the least bit enthused about you as a presidential candidate, you would have been nominated by now?

Posted by Francis at 08:36 AM

Re: Dean not apologizing for his flag remarks: Hate to break this to you, but....

Posted by: Eric at November 9, 2003 09:05 PM

Like Dean's, my comment was poorly worded but I think the meaning was clear. I highlight this excerpt from the article you cite: "At the same time he said his comments had been misconstrued and he did not back away from his conviction that the party had to make inroads with white Southerners..." So, I mean, yes, he apologized for ticking people off (although I think they all overreacted, and deliberately so in some cases), but he didn't just back off from the subject as suddenly too controversial to keep talking about. That's what I was trying to say. I guess I have enough disappointed memories of, oh, to pick a politician at random, Bill Clinton wussing out on issues he once seemed to have some level of conviction about, that having a candidate who doesn't do that seems like big news.

Posted by: Francis at November 9, 2003 09:22 PM

Still, John Kerry sucks the big one. Let's keep him and his aquanet hairspray out of the Whitehouse.

Posted by: romey at March 16, 2004 12:22 AM

John Kerry is showing the world what an [epithet involving imparting negative qualities to one's nether parts removed -- Ed.] he is every time he opens his mouth. First of all, he's a catholic, secondly he's divorced, thirdly, nothing but negatives ever come out of his mouth. When has someone like this ever become president??? Never (and they never will)


Posted by: Dick Nibbler at April 7, 2004 11:26 PM

You have the Catholics of the world trembling, sir.

Posted by: Francis at April 7, 2004 11:30 PM


Posted by: TD at April 26, 2004 07:36 PM

I have no idea what you are talking about, TD, but thank you for your candid opinion.

Posted by: Francis at April 27, 2004 12:42 AM