Demonstrate support by voting against
Mark Steyn:
...
"Ever since last summer, I've been mocking Sen. Kerry's tortured explanations of why his vote in favor of such-and-such in fact demonstrates his staunch opposition to it. As I wrote a couple of months back:
" 'His vote against the first Gulf war was, he says, a sign of his support for the first Gulf war. Whereas his vote in favor of the Iraq war was a sign of his opposition to the Iraq war. And his vote against funding America's troops in Iraq is a sign of his support for America's men and women in uniform. On the same principle, I think the best way voters this November can demonstrate their support for John Kerry is by voting against him.'
"Even I, though, would have balked at so crude and obvious a parody as this line some Kerry impersonator did on the radio the other day:
" 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.'
"Oh, hang on. That's apparently the real senator, explaining to an audience of veterans why he voted against funding the Iraqi reconstruction:
" 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.' Got that?
...
"Also nonoperative is the senator's go-ahead-punk bluster about foreign policy. For months, he has been droning in his stump speech that, if George W Bush wants to fight this election on national security, Mr. Kerry has three words for him: 'Bring it on.' So Mr. Bush brought it on — with a 30-second ad arguing that the senator is weak on defense.
"And suddenly the campaign is curled up on the floor in a fetal position whimpering it's just totally unfair making such a horrible personal attack. Watching him in New Hampshire, I always thought, when Mr. Kerry dares you to 'bring it on,' he couldn't quite bring it off. As all military strategists say, no plan survives first contact with the enemy. And so it proved."
Mark Steyn:
...
"Ever since last summer, I've been mocking Sen. Kerry's tortured explanations of why his vote in favor of such-and-such in fact demonstrates his staunch opposition to it. As I wrote a couple of months back:
" 'His vote against the first Gulf war was, he says, a sign of his support for the first Gulf war. Whereas his vote in favor of the Iraq war was a sign of his opposition to the Iraq war. And his vote against funding America's troops in Iraq is a sign of his support for America's men and women in uniform. On the same principle, I think the best way voters this November can demonstrate their support for John Kerry is by voting against him.'
"Even I, though, would have balked at so crude and obvious a parody as this line some Kerry impersonator did on the radio the other day:
" 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.'
"Oh, hang on. That's apparently the real senator, explaining to an audience of veterans why he voted against funding the Iraqi reconstruction:
" 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.' Got that?
...
"Also nonoperative is the senator's go-ahead-punk bluster about foreign policy. For months, he has been droning in his stump speech that, if George W Bush wants to fight this election on national security, Mr. Kerry has three words for him: 'Bring it on.' So Mr. Bush brought it on — with a 30-second ad arguing that the senator is weak on defense.
"And suddenly the campaign is curled up on the floor in a fetal position whimpering it's just totally unfair making such a horrible personal attack. Watching him in New Hampshire, I always thought, when Mr. Kerry dares you to 'bring it on,' he couldn't quite bring it off. As all military strategists say, no plan survives first contact with the enemy. And so it proved."
Comments
Post a Comment