I don't say that as an endorsement of him. If he were a communist I might at least have some respect for the man. He'd be a red, sure, but he'd have a defineable comprehensible position. Instead it's virtually impossible to get a real read on what kind of president he'd be.
The right wingers are using this against Kerry very effectively, by essentially painting him with every negative brush they can think of. He's a hardcore leftist who votes the ACLU line more frequently than Ted Kennedy (Damn pro-liberty bastard!) AND he's an ardent flip-flopper who makes decisions based purely on what's politically expedient. He's dishonest about his military career because one of his purple hearts might be bogus (is this supposed to be a counterargument to the ACKNOWLEDGED fact that Bush took time off FROM THE NATIONAL GUARD IN WARTIME to work on a political campaign?)
So how is John Kerry responding? No seriously, that's not a rhetorical question. I can't figure it out.
I'm beginning to think that John Kerry might be trying to be Bill Clinton without the Charisma, which is sort of like being Manute Bol without the height, which is to say that there's not much point in it.
Clinton was something of a chameleon when it came to policy. Yes he did have some well-defined positions that helped drive his candidacy, but he was very good at reaching compromises that satisfied nobody and didn't achieve much of anything. Don't ask don't tell was a policy that makes absolutely no sense, and yet he made it seem like a victory for gay rights. "Congratulations you faggy bastards. You can now be in the military if you stay in the closet. This is different from before because now we won't OFFICIALLY be trying to root out your fudgepacked asses. Also you can wear a handbag in the field."
The thing is, Clinton was unique. He had incredibly charisma that comes along once every few generations. The kind that Kennedy had. Also it was an entirely different time, and Clinton faced different challenges.
Despite all that Clinton only won a plurality, not a majority. People forget that. And Perot syphoned off more Republican votes than Democratic. I think if Perot were running today he might actually stand a chance of winning, well if he hadn't blown his wad in the last two (I don't mean his financial wad, I mean his credibility wad.) Never before has one man gotten so far on big floppy ears and pie charts.
Anyway I am getting more and more pissed at Kerry as his campaign is basically in hibernation mode and he still REFUSES to stake out strong positions on any issues. Or even detailed positions. If he wants to be nuanced, fine, but then EXPLAIN that you pansy!
I know what people say. That Kerry has been a successful politican and knows more than the rest of us. But he was successful as a liberal senator from Massachusets. You can keep that job even if you're responsible for the drowning death of an innocent (as in not evil, not unworldly) young woman you were having an affair with, and that's a proven fact. As a presidential candidate he comes off as Dukakis without the substance. This is the guy we picked to take on Karl Rove and his team? It's not too late to enlist Kucinich. At least he'd be making some noise.
The longer this lasts the more I begin to suspect that this was all some Skull and Bones conspiracy to keep Bush in power. Enlist a democrat willing to throw the election so that George can stay in power. I wouldn't put it past those blue-blooded butt bandits (gay frat sex? Check.) If Kerry were subtly trying to throw the election to Bush how much more could he do?
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Johnny K. is afraid to engage in Abu Ghraib because of his own war record and is secretly plotting strategery, as Rush would say. Maybe he has some brilliant plan to take down Bourgie Bushie.
Maybe my ass will turn into a purple haze and seduce me a Rockette.