Advisory Opinion

Kerry's Band of Brothers

Apparently these guys aren't looking to be in Kerry's band:

July 31, 2004 -- SCRANTON, Pa. — John Kerry's heavily hyped cross-country bus tour stumbled out of the blocks yesterday, as a group of Marines publicly dissed the Vietnam War hero in the middle of a crowded restaurant. Kerry was treating running mate Sen. John Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, to a Wendy's lunch in Newburgh, N.Y., for their 27th wedding anniversary — an Edwards family tradition — when the candidate approached four Marines and asked them questions.

The Marines — two in uniform and two off-duty — were polite but curt while chatting with Kerry, answering most of his questions with a "yes, sir" or "no, sir."

But they turned downright nasty after the Massachusetts senator thanked them "for their service" and left.

"He imposed on us and I disagree with him coming over here shaking our hands," one Marine said, adding, "I'm 100 percent against [him]."

A sergeant with 10 years of service under his belt said, "I speak for all of us. We think that we are doing the right thing in Iraq," before saying he is to be deployed there in a few weeks and is "eager" to go and serve.

Great Americans. (Via Instapundit.)

What's Wrong With Kerry

Andrew Sullivan reflects on Kerry's acceptance speech:

[T]he reason the Kerry speech was so troubling is that it seems to me an indicator of what's wrong with the candidate: arrogant, prolix, unable to discipline his own tortured nuance, and too clever by half.

Indeed. But that's just a partial list.

Reporting for Duty

Creepy.

A Hedgehog, Not a Fox

A VDH Q&A:

Why does America lack the courage we had 60 years ago? Was life simpler with no TV and no "up to the minute” news?

Hanson: Partly. We are more affluent, leisured, safe, and removed from the terror of nature in all its savagery — plague, famine, natural disasters, etc. We suffer from the Hamlet disease of finding a thousand reasons not to do something rather than one to act. That fact of decisive action is the single best recommendation for George Bush; he is a hedgehog, not a fox. And his one great truth is that he grasped that these Islamicists and their autocratic patrons wish to destroy the West as represented by the United States. And he really will act — not preach like Carter and give us the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and a fascist Iran, not talk fire and brimstone and then do almost nothing in Lebanon after the slaughter of Marines like Reagan, not like his father stop short of Baghdad, and not go to Sandy Berger and focus groups and get us a cruise missile and a worried brow like Clinton. Intellectuals hate Bush for his action and failure to consult 1,000 different nuanced talking heads, but most Americans, when they get into that booth in November, are going to ask themselves one question: “does Osama bin Laden and the terrorist sympathizers want Bush or Kerry to win this election?”— and vote accordingly.

I hope he's right about the voting booth.

UPDATE: This entire batch of VDH Q&As is really quite interesting.

Kerry: Pro- or Anti-War?

The RNC has a very entertaining video out cataloging John Kerry's various positions on the war in Iraq. This is a man who will say anything if politically expedient. An empty man.

Liberals

The Anal Philosopher knows liberals better than they the know themselves:

Not only are liberals not entitled to govern; they don’t deserve to govern. They need to grow up, develop a more holistic view of the person, develop a more realistic view of human nature, and cultivate a sense of patience. They need to stop patting themselves on the back for being benevolent, compassionate, caring, and sympathetic. Benevolence is neither necessary nor sufficient for acting rightly. Caring, far from being a synonym for justice, is often an impediment to it. It’s not for nothing that we say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Liberals prove it every day.

There's more where that came from.

Looking Foolish

Yet another Dukakis moment.

Did you know . . .

that John Kerry served in Vietnam? Really, he did.

Reader Feedback

I laughed out loud at this email from a reader:

Just wanted to let you know I actually disagree with every single statement you made save the one regarding Vonage! There you are right on!

That's it.

Well . . . at least I got it right once.

Convention Odds and Ends

In introducing her father, one the Kerry daugters just said that if you want to drink clean water and breathe clean air, you must be involved in this struggle. Risible.

Meanwhile, Morgan Freeman has apparently narrated Kerry's Spielberg-produced canned introduction film. I wonder if Michael Moore had a hand in it. It's very slick indeed, with theme music and everything. I suppose that's okay, Kerry needs all the help he can get.

The introduction includes some great spin on Kerry's anti-war activities after the Vietnam War. The story is that he felt he had to speak up since America's leaders weren't being truthful with the public. Really? How does he explain his blatant lies and exaggerations concerning atrocities being committed by American troops?

UPDATE: In the long lead-up to Kerry speech, the obvious point the Dems wanted to drive home is that Kerry is tough, a war hero, and therefore can be trusted on matters of national security. Did you notice that in Max Cleland's speech, the applause was rather tepid throughout. But the single line that was roundly applauded by the Democratic attendees was the one about Kerry not alienating our (always unnamed) allies. Is that really what is most important to these people?

UPDATE TWO: I was wrong above. The Kerry "biopic" was produced by a Spielberg protege; Spielberg only played an "advisory role."