John Kerry: Replace the US Government with WHAT exactly?

From The Opinion Journal today:

In an essay a couple of weeks ago, Lawrence Kaplan noted that in the name of "anti-imperialism," many Democrats stand in opposition to democracy in Iraq.

Now one Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, has come out against democracy in America. "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States," Kerry told a New Hampshire audience, the Boston Globe reports.

Kerry didn't say what kind of regime he wants to replace our democratic republic--a military dictatorship? a monarchy?--but he was very critical of the U.S. for having made what he called an "end run around the U.N." So perhaps he favors replacing the U.S. government with a U.N. protectorate. Such a proposal seems unlikely to go over well with American voters, though.

Another possibility is that Kerry was misusing the word "regime," and that what he meant to call for was a change of administration, which of course would come to pass in the unlikely event that Kerry were elected president. But could this be? After all, Democrats are supposed to be way smarter than Republicans, so you wouldn't expect a guy like Kerry to go around making stupid verbal miscues.

Of course, this would be the same John Kerry who spoke for, and voted for the "Regime Change" resoultion, which we all recall was written by the Clinto White House and passed by the US Senate in 1998.

Also the same John Kerry who voted for the "Use of Force" resolution last November.

But it's also the same John Kerry who desperately wants to be President and has Howard Dean quickly gaining on him among the far-left wing of the democrat party as more and more people find out what a pompous, lying blowhard he is.

 

Dan, It's called the Electoral College. It's been in all the papers.

But hey - you may have set a new record here: it only took ONE post for a leftist to start whining about Al Gore.

 

Re: Re: John Kerry: Replace the US Government with WHAT exactly?

Actually, I kind of like Howard. Not that I'd vote for him, but he knows what he is about and doesn't stick his finger into the wind before he gets out of bed in the morning.

I would much rather have an honest, principled liberal democrat in the White House than some spineless, gutless political hack (of either party) who calls a pollster to find out if he should take a dump.

I might not agree with the guy, but I like having a President I can respect.

John has had a firm grasp on the liberal wing, and he figured to ride it to the convention. But the more people actually get to know him, instead of just seeing that Lincolnesque craggy face, and the more they actually hear Dean's opinions, the less attractive Big John looks.

He has a fight on his hands, and he will turn hard left to try and shore up his support. Hope he rots in hell.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: John Kerry: Replace the US Government with WHAT exactly?

I know. But I can dream.

I've moved to a more Crewesque theme for opening day.

"Sam" is not retired. He's just sleeping off a bender.


1) I take a backseat to no one (and a back seat WITH just about anyone) in my respect for Foos, but regime is not really the same thing.


2) Rocicot ain't my problem, Dan, but I'm guessing that what he was saying is that while there are troops in the field is a piss poor time for Big John to be mewling about "regime change". America has held elections in wartime, )Lincoln, FDR) and may again sometime. We've even changed administrations while the guns were firing (Johnson).

We can quibble ( as I've already done here - I love a good quibble) about the meaning of the term, but for most people the term "regime change" implies something other than going down to the firehouse and punching out chads.

Kerry was going for clever, witty banter. IMO he missed. By a lot. He's a pro, a US Senator, and whether you like it or not you have to be a little extra careful what you say and what words you choose while American bodies are stopping bullets someplace.

Always been true. He knows that as well as anybody else, or he ought to.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Kerry: Replace the US Government with WHAT exactly?

I'm not sure.

Is "AWOL" an acronym meaning "was an F-105 pilot in the National Guard"?

Oh wait, no, "AWOL" is a synonym for "was an anti-war demonstrator at Oxford"

I remember now.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Kerry: Replace the US Government with WHAT exactly?

Your interpretation.

"Temerity" isn't the issue here, Dan. It's that the election is two years away. The war will be over in a couple weeks most likely. There was no urgency to what he had to say that couldn't have waited.

Interesting take. Or maybe bizarre would be a better word. Racicot is an unknown political operative. Kerry is a United States Senator.

And Al Gore spent a little time walking around with two bodyguards. Clinton was in England burning his draft card. That didn't seem to disqualify him from dropping bombs on innocent Serbian women and children.

Or innocent aspirin factories.