‘Tis the season to be jolly. Unless you’re a Democrat, that is. Last week saw ABC’s Ted Koppel and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich get into a cat fight during a nationally televised debate. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, either attempting to appear “hip” or increase voter turnout among gang members, gave a profanity-laced interview to Rolling Stone magazine, saying that President Bush has “f—ed up” the war in Iraq.
Sounding more like Mike Tyson than a U.S. senator, Kerry’s trash talk proved only that his wife’s ketchup fortune can buy him $200 haircuts, but not class.
Perhaps Joe Lieberman, who nearly accused Al Gore of being a traitor last week, will now sponsor legislation requiring Democrat presidential candidates to wear warning labels for explicit language. To top off the week of Democrat bliss, Al Sharpton blamed the former vice president for trying to “shut us up,” referring to the eight Democrat presidential contenders Gore did not endorse.
Yes, the Christmas spirit is alive and well in the Democrat Party. With the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary just weeks away, the stakes are getting higher for the nine naysayers fighting for the opportunity to likely be beaten in a general election by President George W. Bush. In fact, so confident are many Democrats that this election is a lost cause — regardless of who wins the nomination — that they are already positioning themselves for 2008.
And whoever the Democrat nominee may be five years from now, that person will have one heck of a job rescuing the party from the McGovernites who are pulling it further to the radical left. Leading that effort is former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean — a medical doctor trained by Planned Parenthood — who picked up Al Gore’s endorsement and, in the process, stabbed his former running mate, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, in the back.
At a hastily scheduled Harlem endorsement rally last Tuesday — just down the road from his philandering friend, William the Zipper — Gore praised Dean for making “the correct judgment about the Iraq war.” Though Gore has yet to set foot in liberated Iraq or talk to the people who no longer have to live in Saddam’s bondage, he declares that President Bush made a “catastrophic mistake” in Iraq and has led our country into a “quagmire.” Had Gore not been escorted through Vietnam by bodyguards, he might know what a “quagmire” is. But his limited vocabulary was overshadowed by his convoluted sense of history when he said of the war in Iraq, that the United States “has never made a worse foreign policy mistake.”
Desperately seeking relevancy with the radical Birkenstock Brigade of the Democrat party, Gore is moving further to the left, abandoning reality with regard to this nation’s efforts to fight the war on terror and is endorsing the foreign policy and domestic security delusions of Howard Dean.
For example, Howard Dean’s homeland security plan, to quote directly and liberally, is “built around three circles of defense”: a “circle of preparation,” a “circle of protection” and a “circle of prevention,” which, I guess, would make it a three-ring circus. He believes the Bush administration should have been “better prepared” for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and accuses the president of knowing about the attacks beforehand.
“There are many interesting theories about” Sept. 11, Dean told National Public Radio’s Diane Rehm last week. “The most interesting,” he said, “is that (President Bush) was warned ahead of time by the Saudis.” Maybe that was the clincher for the Gore endorsement — it really wasn’t the eight years of Clinton-Gore neglect on terrorism and al Qaeda, it was all George Bush’s fault. As Jon Lovitz used to say on Saturday Night Live, “Yeah, that’s the ticket.”
Though there has not been a terrorist attack on the homeland since Sept. 11, 2001, Dean irresponsibly asserts that Americans “are less secure today” than they were before then. The reason, he believes, is that “the Bush administration abandoned the war on terror for other misplaced priorities.” Among them, the Bush tax relief that has been the catalyst for the current economic recovery.
If Dean had his way, he would repeal the tax cuts to fund “universal health care” (which the public already rejected under Hillary Rodham) and his “three-circle homeland defense strategy.” He’d establish a Homeland Defense Trust Fund, to be partly financed by transferring $1 billion each year from the ballistic missile defense budget, but he does not explain how homeland security would be strengthened by raiding funds from missile defense, even when he claims that North Korea represents a greater threat to the United States than Iraq.
Setting aside his substance, Dean’s style puts him in the running for the John Kerry Award for Vulgarity in Politics. Dean pejoratively refers to the president as “this guy” and accuses the commander in chief, who has led us brilliantly in the war on terror, of not “understanding anything about defense.”
He has falsely accused President Bush of cutting combat pay for service members overseas and curtailing the benefits of 164,000 veterans who are stateside. Even when articulating policy positions, Dean comes across as deceitful. In October 2003, he told CNBC that “we have no choice” but to support the $87 billion reconstruction package for Iraq, but the following month was running paid ads which bragged, “I’m against spending another $87 billion” in Iraq.
Perhaps if the $87 billion went in Al Gore’s lockbox, Dean would support it again. Though it really doesn’t matter. Gore and Dean believe that by teaming up they can both become relevant to the state of American politics. It’s not going to happen. Howard Dean may win the nomination, but his name will appear in the history books beside George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. And thankfully, he will take Al Gore with him.