Is Kerry Up To Fighting Special Interests?
January 21, 2004
by
Roger F. Gay
Front-runner Howard Dean lost ground quickly after sneaking into
churches in Iowa for photos and a chance to be seen standing next
to Jimmy Carter. Most professional pundits haven't figured out exactly
why Dean finished a distant third, but a few quick interviews with
some real people suggest an entirely unexpected development in U.S.
politics. Voters might care about honesty and integrity. Dean left
no doubt that he has neither.
The way the election process works, the primary choices are between
those who are running, and John Kerry received the benefits; a candidate
who had not previously received much attention and was badly in need
of cash to "get his message out." Before the analysis of
his success gets too far out of control, it might be worthwhile to
consider the fact that he'd lost his voice before the Iowa caucus
and failed to show up at some events altogether. Perhaps it's worth
considering that during the exact period he was "gaining momentum"
he was keeping his mouth shut and enjoying Howard Dean's self-destructive
exuberance.
In his victory speech however, Kerry may have succeeded in sticking
his Achilles heal directly into his gaping mouth. "We came from
behind here, and we came for a fight here, and my message is now to
the special interest who call the White House home: We're coming to
you." ... "you stood with me," Kerry told supporters,
"so that we can take on George Bush and the special interests
and literally give America back its future and its soul."
The question that now must be asked is which special interests he
wants to remove from political power and which special interests he'd
like to see gain power in their place. Who, in John Kerry's mind,
represents the soul of America and who gets condemned to hell if he's
elected? Democrats are not exactly credible representatives of truth,
justice, and the American way.
Over the past two decades they've conspired to destroy the Constitution
(a "living document" open to whatever interpretation seems
profitable at the moment), the family (marriage as we knew it no longer
exists and human rights have been completely eliminated from divorce
proceedings), and capitalism (the workplace is now mired in domestic
quarrels, government regulation, and expensive new governmentally
imposed functions brought on by overzealous feminist legislation).
He mentioned big business scandals. Perhaps he shouldn't have. A
key player in the largest, most destructive and painful scandals was
Arthur Andersen, an international accounting firm that also set up
large government systems that are still driven by fraudulent accounting.
(See Corporate
Fraud: It's Clinton's Fault! (7/11/02) ) Is Kerry suggesting
he'd be willing to go after government fraud that's historically been
supported by his party, or does he just mean to continue the war against
capitalism as the friend of fat-cat Republicans and the enemy of the
working masses?
John Kerry was an original cosponsor of the Violence Against Women
Act (VAWA), a waste basket of feminist legislation that has drawn
criticism from all quarters. Before going to www.JohnKerry.com
to get his version of it, it is well to remember that rape, assault,
and battery were all crimes before VAWA was enacted. Those who were
paying attention remember this as legislation primarily designed to
jack-up intimidation against men in divorce court. All men are
evil. All women are victims. In any domestic proceeding it must
be assumed that every man is an irresponsible, wife-beating lout
who shouldn't be allowed near his own children unless he pays a whole
lot of money. Could John Kerry ever become interested in fighting
special interests even when he's a proud sponsor of their legislation?
Despite the fact that questions have been raised, the Iowa Caucus
might have been right. Perhaps John Kerry is the best the Democrats
have to offer. But if some candidate leaves a few befuddled, sushi-eating,
statistically-dependent, professional political consultants behind
for a few days to think for himself and ask real people about family,
the Constitution, freedom, capitalism, honesty, and integrity, he
might find out that Americans actually care about such things. And
Democrats might discover why they lost both Houses of Congress and
the White House.
Sheesh! How unlikely is that? My guess is that the liars and cheats
on the other side of the aisle are safe for another four years.