08 April 2004
What else does Kerry think he knows or imagine he knows or mistakenly "knows" incorrectly?
Twice during the
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 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 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 and 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
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
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 imagine he knows or mistakenly "knows"
incorrectly? The ignorance of this man could be a bottomless pit. It is time
to begin to plumb the depths of luxuriant, lazy and little-minds Leftism.
Why not begin with Kerry?
Bruce Walker's articles can be found at the Conservative Truth.
Email Bruce Walker
this Article to a Friend