John Kerry gave a speech yesterday and claimed that he, the almighty liberal, would have prevented the current Mid East conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. "If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry during a noon stop at Honest John's bar and grill in Detroit's Cass Corridor. "The president has been so absent on diplomacy when it comes to issues affecting the Middle East," Kerry said. "We're going to have a lot of ground to make up because of it."
Senator Kerry made the claim at a bar and grill… I guess that explains it, he must have been drunk. He said because President Bush focused on Iraq, it created the Middle East tensions we are seeing today. Of course, Kerry was pushing for the war in Iraq long before Bush was in office and actually voted for it, so I think he was focused as well. But don’t tell him that; it’s practically a sacrilege on Kerry’s part to remind America that he and his fellow Democrats wanted this war just as much as Dick Cheney.
I don’t even know what that statement means. He along with 'diplomacy' would have prevented what exactly? What tensions was he going to subdue? Kerry must be thinking of the magical wand of appeasement that I referred to last week. Or does he have connections with Hezbollah? How was he going to stop the actions of a terrorist group? Wait a minute…my mistake. I’m actually thinking in logical terms. I have to think in lefty terms. OK, I get it now. Everything is Bush’s fault…just him not being here would solve everything. Wow, that is a lot easier to do than trying to think.
**Anyway, this goes to the heart of the difference between rational and responsible leadership and to what’s known as liberal leadership. I mean, yeah Democrats may be great on the environment but when it comes to combating terrorism there is no way they should be trusted. Democrats want the terrorist enemy to be appeased because they think that conflict is bad. Republicans want the terrorist enemy destroyed because we think that conflict is the reality. Democrats think a cease fire is peace while Republicans think a cease fire will only help the enemy. Democrats think negotiation is possible with the unreasonable and genocidal and Republicans know that it's not. Democrats believe that Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda are capable of seeing the error of their ways, while Republicans know that these groups will soon attack a major western city with nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. Democrats think that terrorists can be reasoned with and Republicans know that the only good terrorist is a dead one. See the difference…
Sure you can end the current hostility by coming to a cease-fire agreement but you can’t end the jihad. In fact all a cease fire would do right now is allow for Hezbollah to regroup, reorganize, re-equip and will send the distinct message that they can deliver as mush damage as they wish because the world will sooner rather than later, force Israel to stop. It shows weakness.