The brave and perceptive Stanley Crouch speaks out again in a forum that is usually not so hospitable to the truth about jihad: the New York Daily News.
The constant discussion of John Kerry and John Edwards in superficial, gossip-column terms may result in their soon being called John & John or J & J, but it will not change something that we have to keep our eyes on, here and abroad. The Islamic extremists bent on waging holy war will not disappear. They are intent on destroying secular governments and turning the clock back to a time when the worshipers of Allah ran what was then considered the world. One can blame any government available for riling them up and inspiring others to join them, but the facts are what they are and will remain past November. They are at war with us, and we need to face the fact that changing an administration, if it comes to that, will not cause the Prophet to appear in the skies with a referee's whistle and blow it to signal that the extremists should stop the kidnapping, the decapitating, the car bombing and constant murdering....These are not the times for trivial pursuits. What we need to know from Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards is what kind of a war strategy they have and what it would do to give us a better chance to defeat these enemies who do not go on vacations, follow elections or respond to polls. What, exactly, do these two men propose to keep our shores safe and to handle the troubles we are faced with in Iraq as well as with the growing body of jihadists? The rest is fluff.
Mr Crouch has made very pertinent comments.Forget
white teeth and boyish smile and who has the best
looking wife/husband. Our leaders can be ugly, lame or humpbacked as long as they have intelligience, grasp on the real threat which faces Western World.Courage and bold resolve to act quickly, would be a bonus.
I am constantly amazed at the buffet line of elected officials that seem completely unaware of Middle Eastern history and the real nature of the threats we are now facing. It's either that or they are so damn frightened themselves they dare not ever bring the subjects up for fear of releasing confidential information to the public.
I suppose the saying "Ignorance is bliss" may apply nowadays more than ever.
where is our modern day FDR and Churchill
Good.
Where is our modern day Churchhill?
At 1600 Pennsylvania if you talk to some,
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1162618/posts)
or at 10 Downing Street if you talk to others (http://www.probe.org/docs/c-blair.html).
Paul Johnson, a respected British writer and historian, doesn’t make that comparison, but does consider Blair a “man of integrity” and feels that our sitting President has far more in common with a certain Mrs. Thatcher than he does with his own father. A comparison with the “Iron Lady” is of course high praise indeed.
But what of Kerry’s leadership?
Kerry loves to tout his fours months in combat over 30 years ago as a major selling point in his run for the presidency. Well, I worked as a line inspector for a power company for four months. Does that qualify me to be the CEO? Of course not. But since Kerry wants us to focus on his Vietnam service, lets take a critical look at it.
Veteran Charles Plumley served with Kerry and describes him as “self-absorbed, requiring constant supervision.”
“Veteran Steve Gardner said, “I watch him put his crew in jeopardy, his indecisive moves…”
Kerry’s former commanding officer, Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman said, “…I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust – all tenants of command.”
These men, who were among those who served with Kerry, felt strongly enough about his purported service to start a web site (http://www.swiftvets.com) to get their version of the truth out.
While my view of candidate Kerry is far from favorable, I think his endorsement by the Communist Party of the USA says it all. If you visit their web site, be sure to read the “Top Ten Reasons to Defeat Bush,” and compare then to what John Kerry has to say about his platform. Eerily similiar, isn't it?
Hanoi John even uses the vague campaign slogan “Let America be America again,” lifted from a poem by the same name written by Langston Hughes in 1938. What America was Hughes asking for in that poem?
A United States run by the ideals of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin.
Is that your vision of America? An America that can defeat the forces of Jihad? Clearly, Comrade Kerry is not “the right man for the job.”
The anti-Kerry posters have given me an impression that Kerry taking the reigns of the US government is the worst thing that could possibly happen in next years elections, so come on folks fill us less politically minded in on John Edwards' profile.
Edwards: Kerry with almost NO experience in government.
Surely whichever of those two win the election they're going to carry on the "war on terror"(I'd prefer to call it war on Jihad). I'm not talking about Iraq now .Thats almost over apart from the fact that the bombings and assassinations are going to continue for a very long time .That's no longer the coalitions concern, sovereignity has been handed over, that was the plan, so game over...right?So lets get our boys and girls out of there and let Iraqs new democratic government deal with the wave of insurgents, why risk any more american, british and allied lives when ,at least something resembling the original target, has been met.
What I'm getting at is whoever takes over the US government can't just leave it all and forget about it, the jihadists will certainly exploit that mistake.
Keep going , Irans nuclear capabilities ( if any exist) need to be dealt with next, and a couple of other middle eastern states that I could mention, before we can just focus all our might and energy into annihilating every last islamic terror cell from Morrocco to Indonesia. Leave no stone unturned, leave no havens for these terrorist rats to hide in, then the war on terror could be won....
HEY EVERYBODY!!!
Quick , someone contact the Guiness book of records, we have; on this very page, Hughs shortest ever post, IT'S UNANIMOUS!!!
Kerry has already explicitly stated that he hold terrorism to be a matter for the courts, not the military. He wants to go back to Clinton's policy, which of course led teh African embassy bombings, the USS Cole attack, and of course 9/11.
He is a fool of worst rate.
And like CGW mentioned, Edwards is like Kerry, minus expereince. He was an ambulence chaser that "channeled" the spirits of dead children to win million dollar court cases based on junk science.
I wish I was joking, but I'm not.
Here's a short version of what I know about Edwards. He is the fourth-most liberal Senator in the Senate. He made his millions by being a trial lawyer (i.e. ambulance chaser) in some fairly specious cases. I could dredge up more info on his voting record, and his campaign speeches, but I doubt there will be anything there to comfort us. Imagine the headlines if he was a hawk or was hard on terrorism!
~NMJ
I'm a bit pessimistic. The US economy is not going well, the media are making a concerted effort to unseat Bush, and there is a perception that the war in Iraq went badly--despite a casualty rate that ran about 2% of the Korean War's and a functioning Iraqi government in place.
Further, the Democrats are energized. They want to punish Bush for his 2000 squeak-by, even if it means discrediting the soldiers in the field.
This being said, Pres. Kerry (if he happens) will probably have to fight a war. The radical Islamists' have the Democrats' number--that they won't take casualties, they'll be timid, and they won't face reality. Fortunately for Kerry, though, when 9/11 II happens, his opposition will not be made up of people who are likely to subvert a war effort for domestic partisan advantage.
Kepha1~ The economy in the US is growing at a rate comparable to what it was during the latter half of the Reagan years- ie, Higher than during the Clinton years.
As to Kerry- He had better well make Sure there is not a 911 II.
However, if there is:
He and his will be sure to find a way to pin it on Bush.
KeithJoy will be here to defend Kerry.
Kepha1,
Don't beleive the hype. The economy is going great. I just got my 401(k) summary in, and I couldn't be happier. Business is great. The media are just trying to spin it for their best interests. Facts (like the double digit gains in my portfolio) point to a very robust economy.
Looking at history, Kerry/Edwards is going to get crushed, just like Mondale/Ferraro, and possibly worse. The only real question is when the corner will be firmly turned, people fully understand Kerry's ideas, and his poll numbers start their final death spiral. IT has already started.
As people come to know Kerry, his poll numbers are going down. People don't trust him once they get to know him, and with good reason. He has a 30 year history of going against the country's best interests.
While the media has been throwing everything they can at Bush, nothing is sticking. He has never decisively trailed Kerry, even on his worst day.
People are also becoming increasingly aware of the bias in the media aginst Bush, and there stands to be a backlash against Kerry and the media becuase of it.
Picking Edwards, someone almost as liberal as he is and without decent experience, put Kerry out of contention. He has isolated himself far away from the average voter.
Now that the people are pressing him for his platform and his best ideas are shown to be Bush-lite, and his worst ones are obviously so out-o-step with the rest of the population thinks is best for America, he is sinking in his own mediocrity.
I'm not saying Bush is the greatest candidate. I'm just saying Kerry is just that bad and out of touch.
Bush by at least 13%.
Bob, I hope you're right.