John Kerry has gained control of the Bush campaign and has, psychologically and strategically if not yet literally, won the presidential election.
While Kerry’s own party systematically decimates Bush’s competence and character for daring to actually use military force in Iraq and to cut taxes, the Kerry campaign expresses moral outrage that anyone would question Kerry’s own military service in Vietnam–something trumpeted as the whole basis for making him Commander-in-Chief, since nothing in his actions since that time has been remotely pro-defense. In fact, Kerry wants these criticisms of him censored and has appealed to the Federal Election Commission to do just that. Forget the legal mumbo-jumbo and cut the p.c. language of the media: censorship is the goal here. Evidently it’s OK for filmmaker Michael Moore to express his passionate distaste for President Bush, but it’s not OK the other way around. I despise Michael Moore, but I don’t want him censored; why can’t people who despise President Bush grant people who support him the same right? This is all an extension, by the way, of the McCain-Feingold bill passed into law last year, and represents the beginning of outright government censorship in this nation. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
On top of Kerry’s demand for censorship, President Bush is now running around the country declaring what a great soldier John Kerry was and how sorry he is that people who support the Republicans this year dare to question John Kerry’s war record. He’s condemning his own supporters. The latest development we hear is that Bush’s attorney is jumping ship for giving legal counsel to people who criticized John Kerry in the first place. This creates the impression, and likely reflects the reality, that the Bush campaign is falling apart from within. Maybe the Republican convention will feature a tribute to John Kerry.
It seems that President Bush wants democracy in Iraq but is willing to surrender a significant amount of free speech and personal integrity to make it look like he’s a gentleman and a nice person. Like his father, he is unwilling or unable to see that his opponents are not gentlemen and do not play that game. His political adversaries are pacifists and apologists when it comes to dealing with mortal enemies abroad, but they are ruthless, double-standard bearing opponents when it comes to regaining power. If President Bush was willing to take on Saddam Hussein, then why is he so afraid of John Kerry?
Hopefully, Bush will do much better at his upcoming convention and during the official election campaign than he has to date. It’s his last chance, assuming it’s not too late already. If Bush doesn’t change course soon, we won’t even be looking at a close race this time around. Imagine John Kerry winning in a landslide–without once having to take an honest, consistent position (even a wrong one) on any issue.
Readers are encouraged to send this column to the Republican National Committee, contact information to be found here:
http://www.gop.com/ContactUs/Default.aspx
