home > archive > 2004 > this article
Kerry the slow
By Bruce Walker
Twice during odd odyssey of Howard Dean's campaign for the Democrat presidential nomination, I noted how profoundly ignorant this one-time Democrat frontrunner was about almost everything that a president needed to know.
When asked about how he would deal with the problem of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, Dean droned that America needed to get the "Soviet Union" involved in the process. He considered the "Soviet Union" so important to this goal that he mentioned the "Soviet Union" four times in one paragraph. Dean was not asked about the "Soviet Union" in the question or anywhere else during the interview. He alone felt the "Soviet Union" was critical.
The Soviet Union, of course, has been dead in every way except in the minds of reflexive Americaphobic Leftists since 1992. A generation of students has passed through the public school system since the Evil Empire imploded.
The end of that regime is the salient geopolitical fact of the last fifty years, and Dean based his campaign of hate against President George W. Bush upon Dean's superior understanding of geopolitical facts. Yet how on earth could someone this ignorant know if what President Bush was doing was good or bad?
Dean also told Chris Matthews that he supported right-to-work laws, elaborating: "I very much believe that states ought to have the right to recognize - to organize their own laws. So I'm not likely as president...to order states to change them." The best man Democrats could offer America in January believed that the president can "order" states to change their laws, and this man had once been Governor Dean.
These are the same Democrats who worry about what Republican judicial appointees would do to the Constitution - note to Leftist readers: the president cannot order state governments to change their laws - and believe that their view of federalism is superior to what conservatives believe. What Dean pondered that he could do as president - issue orders compelling state legislatures to do what he wished - is truly scary.
But this vast ignorance did not faze Democrats until Dean began to look like a sure loser. Other candidates for the nomination said that, sure, they would support a man who did not know the Soviet Union was gone and thought that he could issue commands to state legislatures over President Bush.
This is no big surprise. Leftists know almost nothing at all. Dean was the son of New England rich patricians who offered him all that elite Leftism can offer, which is to say "nothing." Dean doubtless never had to seriously defend his dogmatic hatred of America at a Manhattan cocktail party or in the classroom of a Marxist professor.
Now it seems that John Kerry is just as ignorant, just as unreflective, just as dull and just as vain. The pathetic truth about this blue blood who never had to actually work a day in his life is leaking out as he begins to leave the scripted, vetted monologues and to answer questions.
When Kerry tried at a black college in Mississippi to pander to black fears of white bigots, the senator recited the tired comparison of the murder of Matthew Shepherd, the gay man savagely killed in Wyoming, with the white racists who dragged a black man to his death behind a truck in Texas (Get it? "Texas" and "Wyoming"? "Bush" and "Cheney"? Leftists are so very subtle!)
The problems started when Kerry actually opened his mouth: "Let me tell you something. When Matthew Shepard gets crucified on a fence in Wyoming only because he was gay, when Mr. King gets dragged behind of a (sic) truck down in Texas by chains and his body is mutilated only because he's gay, I think that's a matter of rights in the United States of America.."
First recall the context of his remarks. Kerry was speaking at a planned event at a black college in Mississippi. His comments on the crimes in Wyoming and Texas were canned, rehearsed remarks. Kerry was not required to cognate more than, say, a Chatty Cathy doll. You could have done this; I could have done this; Kerry, however, could not do it.
The man killed in Texas, and the reason why this was relevant to a black audience in the South, was James Byrd Jr., who was not killed "...only because he's gay" (he was not gay) but because he was black. But Kerry never mentioned Byrd, did he? He mentioned "Mr. King." Who was "Mr. King"? He was one of the bigoted sociopaths who brutally murdered Byrd.
A few days ago, Kerry revealed more dumbfounding ignorance. When asked about the conflict between his Catholic faith and his political positions - by the way, one guess which trumps which: God or politics? - Kerry added: "My oath privately between me and God was defined in the Catholic church by Pius XXIII and Pope Paul VI in Vatican II..."
Pope Pius XXIII? There is no "Pope Pius XXIII". There never has been a "Pope Pius XXIII." In fact, the last pope with the name "Pius" died when Kerry was about fourteen years old. Kerry was obviously confusing this imaginary "Pope Pius XXIII" (who does not exist) with Pope John XXIII.
Does this matter? Well, yes, it matters. Pope John XXIII, along with Pope John Paul II, have been critical figures in modern history. The positions both of these good men took, including their theological positions on interfaith issues is profoundly important in a world in which Christians, Jews and Moslems must live together in peace.
Roman Catholicism is the state religion of Spain. Catholicism, along with Islam, are the two most significant theological forces in those lands most likely to be battlegrounds in the war against civilization. Hispanics, the largest immigrant group in America, are overwhelmingly Catholic. During his imaginary eye to eye discussions with these invented world leaders who want him to be president, Kerry may need to know who Pope John XXIII was and what he believed.
But we should be fair to Kerry and give him a chance to redeem himself. How about this: allow a cub conservative reporter to ask Kerry in a live interview twenty questions that any president should know about America and the world. This reporter should come up with the questions himself and share them with no one.
These questions need not be the sort which a cub Leftist reporter sprung on Governor Bush. In fact, the more likely that ordinary Americans will know the answer to these questions, the better. Kerry seems to forget critical facts. Vietnam, for example, was "Richard Nixon's War" even though LBJ was president when Kerry served in Vietnam.
What else does Kerry think he knows or imagines he knows or mistakenly "knows" incorrectly? The ignorance of this man could be a bottomless pit. It is time to begin to plump the depths of luxuriant, lazy and little-minds Leftism. Why not begin with Kerry?
Bruce Walker is a senior writer with Enter Stage Right. He is also a frequent
contributor to The Pragmatist and The Common Conservative.
Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.