*TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: At SouthernMoss' side forever!
Interesting Commentary on Kerry
Here is a commentary from today's WorldNetDaily that pretty much nails it. And this from a source that usually might support Kerry.....
Kerry's apology not accepted
November 3, 2006
By Rees Lloyd
After a national uproar over the outrageous remarks denigrating the intelligence of American troops in Iraq of Democrat Party leader John Kerry the man who still would be president and commander in chief ("I deserve a second chance," he has publicly stated) who at first defiantly refused to apologize for his slur of the troops in Pasadena, Calif., Monday issued on Wednesday a mealy-mouthed apology not for what he said, but for what he called the "misinterpretation" of what he said.
In doing so, Kerry, attempting to excuse himself, compounds his insult of the troops and all veterans who have served and insults the intelligence of all Americans as if we are all so lacking in "smart(s)" that we do not know what words he in fact spoke.
Those words are:
"Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Those are Kerry's words and they are now writ in stone.
No amount of Democrat linguistic legerdemain can torture those words into what Kerry and his Democrat defenders want to foist on the American people as a "botched joke" in which he really was not talking about our troops but about President Bush.
Kerry and his Democrat spinmeisters apparently ascribe to the theory of huckster P.T. Barnum that "there is a sucker born every minute," and we Americans are but 300 million suckers to be duped by Kerry and the Democrats into believing that we cannot trust our own eyes and ears, and intelligence, but rather we should instead trust them to tell us that the words he said really didn't mean what they said..
It brings to mind the famous line of Marx (Groucho, not Karl): "Who are you going to believe? Your own eyes, or me?"
Consider, for instance, the fact that John Kerry did not utter in private or in a vacuum his insult concerning the intelligence of those who serve now, and by implication, all veterans who have served.
He did it in a public speech at a college in Pasadena, meaning it to be heard and reported on by the media.
Further, he did not utter it as a lone ranger of elitist liberal rhetoric but as a leader of the Democrat Party, in California to publicly support Democrat candidate for governor Phil Angelides.
Moreover, Kerry uttered his insult while surrounded by Democrat Angelides, Democrat Sen. Barbara Boxer, long a "card carrying member of the ACLU" a la Michael Dukakis of tank-riding fame, and Democrat mayor of Los Angeles and former president of the ACLU of Southern California, Antonio Villaraigosa.
All of those leading Democrats, all of whom are ACLU-type liberals, supported what Kerry said by their silence: Not one of those leading figures in the Democrat Party urged an apology then and there; not one objected to, disagreed with or disassociated themselves from Kerry's manifest insult to the intelligence of those who serve.
It has been suggested with tongue in cheek that Kerry's statement should be excused as the inadvertent result of temporary insanity caused by the blinding charisma of Democrat Angelides, although Angelides' charisma has been compared to that of an ambulatory corpse.
I suggest, rather, that the reason those leading Democrats remained silent is that the words John Kerry spoke are what elitist ACLU liberal Democrats like him harbor in their hearts contempt for those who are serving and who have served in the military as just not "smart" enough ... not as "smart" as "us."
I believe, further, that this contempt for those who served, and have served, is further proved by all the desperate attempts of Democrats to convince Americans that John Kerry's words don't mean what they clearly say.
The plain, common-sense fact is that the words of Kerry are the words of Kerry, and they mean what they say. This is true as a matter of ordinary common sense and as the most elemental rule of legal interpretation, the so-called "plain meaning rule," to wit:
"The meaning attributed ... based on a common-sense reading of the words, giving them their ordinary sense and without reference to extrinsic indications of the author's intent Also termed ordinary meaning." (Black's Law Dictionary)
Most Americans will and should apply the "plain meaning," "ordinary meaning," "common-sense" rule to Kerry's words just as they would in their own families and applying that common-sense standard leads to an obvious conclusion: John Kerry, in his heart, the heart of an East Coast elitist liberal Democrat, believes that those who serve in the military are just less "smart" than those who don't, those who "do well," as he put it.
I am one of those who served, and under the John Kerry Democrat Rule for assessing intelligence, my service, like that of those serving now and all my comrade veterans who have served, is prima facie evidence that I am not "smart" enough not to have served.
That would be true, too, of course, of my grandfather, who served in World War I, and my father, who served in World War II, and my daughter, who proudly, patriotically serves on active duty today.
I do not write these words as a Democrat-hater or liberal-hater. On the contrary, once upon a long time ago, a quarter of a century ago now, I was an ACLU of Southern California staff attorney and knew and respected many ACLU liberal Democrats. But I was also the only veteran on staff, and while I was personally recognized as having intellectual ability, I was, as I was once described by one of their leading members, a "diamond in the rough" in their eyes: working class, former steel worker, truck driver, union man, veteran. Oddly, with a brain. Thus, a "diamond in the rough."
I left the ACLU with a recognition from them for "pioneering efforts in the area of workers rights." I remain grateful for the opportunity that they provided to me by a fellowship to get through law school and a staff position thereafter as attorney, in which I was able, in fact, to carry out pioneering efforts in the area of workers rights that changed California employment law in beneficial measure.
Thus, while I am not an inveterate hater of the Democrat Party, liberals in general or the ACLU in particular, I am disappointed in and mean to fight what they have become, betraying all that they represented themselves to be in my youth, including the representation that they honored veterans, like my grandfather, my father, and now, my daughter.
Kerry's mealy-mouthed apology not for his insult to veterans but for others alleged "misinterpretation" of his words may be accepted by some, but not me.
Kerry may insult me all he wishes my World War I veteran grandfather taught me always to know which end of the horse was talking.
But when he, his Democrat cohorts on stage in Pasadena Angelides, Boxer and Villaraigosa and his Democrat Party insult the generations in my family that served before me, my daughter who serves now and all my comrade veterans, that is something that this veteran will neither forgive nor forget unless and until there is a full, abject apology for the words spoken and an unconditional repudiation by Kerry and the Democrat Party in which I once believed.
© 2006 WorldNetDaily
Rees Lloyd, a longtime California civil rights attorney, is an activist in veterans affairs and an attorney defending veterans memorials.