This is going to be painful. I’m going to have to actually stick up for John Kerry here.
But first, I think I’ll have to say something snarky, just to keep myself in check.
Kerry denigrated the intelligence and education of those who enlist in the armed services, saying that if they didn’t study and do their homework, they’d end up getting sent off to fight in a war. He’s speaking from experience. During their college careers, George W. Bush scored both higher grades and a higher IQ. Kerry went off to fight in the war; Bush stayed in the US. (The irony is that Bush volunteered to go to Viet Nam, but was denied; Kerry volunteered for duty that wasn’t involved in combat, but then was assigned to front-line duty — and chose to end his tour early.)
OK, that’s out of the way. Let’s get to the meat of the issue — what exactly Kerry said, and what he meant.
Kerry’s exact words were this:
“You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
On the surface, a rather flagrant and condescending attack on our troops currently serving. Utterly despicable words, especially from a sitting United States Senator and who nearly became president two years ago. Toss in that they are demonstrably false, as the current educational levels of our forces surpasses the national average, and it’s a real bone-headed move.
But I don’t believe that Kerry meant to say that.
He and his staff say he meant to say “you get US stuck in Iraq” — it was an oblique cheap shot at President Bush, but Kerry omitted the “us.” I find that plausible. While Kerry has a rather extensive history of bad-mouthing our troops, dating back to his testimony before Congress in 1971 and extending as recently as last week, when he denigrated the US forces brought in to help cut down the fighting in Baghdad, this is not quite his style. He tends to go after the troops directly, accusing them of incompetence and atrocities. He doesn’t tend to just randomly slam them and mock them — that he reserves for his political foes.
Part of my (shudder) sympathy for Kerry is that I did something very similar almost exactly a year ago. I was writing about the 60’s and their legacy, and in one paragraph I omitted a simple eight-word clause that utterly perverted the meaning of an entire paragraph, and I unintentionally insulted and slandered a whole group of people that I was trying to praise.
Several readers — some actual Viet Nam veterans, the group I had maligned — caught it, and called it to my attention. Sadly, some of them didn’t immediately realize my actions were accidental, and it bothered them. I was horrified and appalled.
The very next day, I published an apology. It was the only thing I could do. I had been careless and rushed, and something that should never have been published had been shown the light of day. Luckily, the readers who had spotted and complained about the original version saw the apology and correction, adn accepted it. I was damned lucky they did; they would have been justified in quitting reading the blog entirely.
My one regret I still have is that one of them apologized to me in return. I wish I had refused their apologies. He did nothing wrong, and had nothing to apologize for. They were absolutely in the right, they did me a great service by calling me on it, and by not refusing his apologies I tacitly said that they had done wrong as well. Robert, epador, Allen Yackey, old soldier, once again my thanks. And Allen Yackey — it’s pretty late, but I refuse to accept your apology. Save it for when you’ve actually done something wrong.
But that’s where John Kerry failed. He didn’t apologize. He didn’t give a “mea culpa,” didn’t announce “I fucked up,” didn’t even offer a “my bad.” Instead, he defiantly announced that “I apologize to no one” and instead denounced those who had called him on his words.
Senator, Karl Rove didn’t make you drop that word. No right-wing blogger hacked your TelePrompter and cut it out of your speech. You weren’t startled by a shotgun-wielding Dick Cheney. You made an all-too-human error. It’s no big deal. The intended target of your barb is famous for it. He does it on an almost daily basis. (One significant difference, though, is that Bush accepts it about himself, and doesn’t get outraged when it’s reported. Another is that when Bush mangles his sentences, it’s often hilarious.)
Man up, Senator. Act like you got a pair. Own what you said. Apologize and explain that it was an accident. Hell, blame it on not getting enough sleep — that’s how Bill Clinton tried to weasel out of a tax cut pledge. If you’d done that immediately, it would have been worth a day or three of laughs at your expense. And then it would be OVER.
But by stonewalling and blustering and lashing out, you’ve changed a discussion to your foibles into your serious character flaws, and caused great harm to your party’s chances next week — as well as your own future aspirations for higher office.
Once again, we see just what we were so fortunate to avoid almost two years ago. And once again, I am relieved that I didn’t vote for John Kerry for president.
Own your words, Senator. Or they will surely own you.
Update: This says it so perfectly.
Anyone who supports the Kerry spin on this non-gaffe is ignorant or a willing dupe. He meant exactly what he said to that audience of glassy-eyed students.
From on high, he spit on our troops.
There was no gaffe, and there was no joke. He really meant it because he hates America and he hates the military.
He is $hit.
Jonah Goldberg put it best: After all, Kerry is an awful politician, a human toothache with the charisma of a 19th-century Oxford Latin tutor. One can’t rule out the possibility that he simply botched a joke.
But yes, Jonah, in spite of you, I DO rule out that possibility.
If whiny little johnny won’t apologize like a man then he’s baby!! Yeah a baby!! He should stick his head in gravy, and wash it off with bubble gum and send it through the navy!!
The Republicans are trying to twist what John Kerry said hoping this will win the election for them. We know that it was a blotched joke aimed straight at Bush. The fact remains about Iraq. It is nothing more than a trick to get the American people from focusing on the problems in Iraq.
The Republicans will try anything in a time of desperation, especially when the polls are scaring the living daylights out of them.
truthseeker2: “We know that it was a blotched joke aimed straight at Bush.“
Really…HOW? Because Kerry SAYS so??
and then you say: “The Republicans are trying to twist what John Kerry said
TWIST WHAT KERRY SAID?? TWIST??
His words, and the video of him saying them are being replayed VERBATIM.
The Republicans are RESISTING letting KERRY twist them!!
The irony is that Bush volunteered to go to Viet Nam, but was denied; Jay, you should inform Dubya for on NBC Meet the Press Feb 8, 2004 when asked by Russert: “Were you favor of the war in Vietnam?
President Bush: I supported my government. I did. And would have gone had my unit been called up, by the way.
Russert: But you didn’t volunteer or enlist to go.
President Bush: No, I didn’t. You’re right.”
That is perhaps neither here nor there, but the irony is that most everyone on this site breathlessy supports our troops and veterans, except for the only 3 senators: Hagel(REP) McCain (REP)and Kerry(DEM) who have actually had combat experience( in Vietnam) for which, on the contrary, a special venom seems directed at them, for their views , shaped by their war experience. Shouldn’t if we unconditionally support our vets, be giving closer attention to these men; or at least show them the same respect we give for the ‘could haves, should haves’, who been always been extremely careful about their own public sacrifice.
There remains a continuing problem and insult despite your observations, Jay.
He’s cracking a joke about Iraq. He’s implicitly criticizing U.S. efforts there, he’s giving comfort to the enemy again.
To take a cheap shot about Bush’s intellect is one thing; to take the shot in demeaning our effort in Iraq is another. He just needs to STFU.
And another thing.
The fact that Kerry’s speech was illogical, and internally inconsistent, is par for the course with him. It is proof positive he is not very smart.
In this case, he was mixing metaphors in a sense. The preceding elements of the speech were really aimed at Bush, although I don’t think Bush’s name was mentioned. The latter half of the offending portion of the speech was a poor transition to a focus on the President’s decision-making, and not the students’ ending up in Iraq.
It would be extremely illogical, even for Kerry, to say that poor students will likely end up in the military. They’ll end up on welfare, something Kerry is more comfortable supporting, obviously.
Jay Tea, I agree with you on this one. When I read what John Kerry said, it was immediately clear to me what he meant: that if you are poorly educated and don’t study, you will make poor policy decisions.
The use of the word “stuck” has been associated with the decision to remain in Iraq, hence his statement is a jab at the administration’s decision.
If he had said “sent”, it would have been clear that he meant the troops. But he didn’t.
That begs the question, though, why does everything have to be somehow linked back to “Bush Lied, People Died”?
bus rider.. faulty intelligence his, or what he carefully shaped in his State of the Union address, 2003 .Three and half years later in what Rusmfeld said would be a most 6 months, American forces, are still in Iraq.
You can never accuse me of:
1) Being against the Iraq War
2) Not supporting our troops
3) Giving aid to our enemy
No sir. I’m going to clap louder than all of you!!!
As Robert said, noone with an ounce of intelligence would support such an ignorant, stupid, or dishonest person like Kerry to be president.
I wonder why liberals still defend this guy and support the dishonest liberal left and dem party.
BTW, all of you (who cry like babies over someone’s words, but think YOU are going to win a war against terrorists–hilarious).
Show Kerry what you really think of him. Vote against him next Tuesday.
Who’s he running against anyway?
Robert, no need to be so disingenuous. Kerry will be running in 2008. If not for president, then for re-election for the Senate.
In 2002, Massachusetts Republicans couldn’t find ANYONE to run against him. I don’t think that’ll happen again.
J.
Robert: “Vote against him [Kerry] next Tuesday.”
ABSOLUTELY!!
Kerry, and ALL the Dimocrats in the House and Senate are running for choice chairmanships in both houses!!
Vote AGAINST Kerry by voting FOR Republicans!!!
How many feet can John Kerry fit in that mouth of his? Here he is on “Imus in the Morning” today:
Kerry: These guys have failed America. The people who owe an apology are people like Donald Rumsfeld, who didn’t send enough troops, who didn’t listen to the generals, who has made every mistake in the book. . . .
Imus: . . . Senator John McCain, he seems to think–he seems to agree with the Bush administration about your comments. And you know him, obviously, better than I do, but I know him pretty well. And he probably knows what you meant, too.
Kerry: I’m sorry that John McCain has said what he said. John McCain’s been a friend for a long time. But I have to tell you, I think John McCain is wrong about this.
John McCain has been a cheerleader for a policy that is incorrect. John McCain says we ought to send another 100,000 troops over there. First of all, we don’t have another 100,000 troops. Secondly, if you send them over there, it’s going to do exactly what’s already happened, which is attract more terrorists and more jihadists. Our own generals are telling us that it’s the numbers of troops that are the problem.
So the administration didn’t send enough troops and it sent too many troops? If only we had such a decisive, principled leader as president!
Exerpt and comments from WSJ website.
Two Roberts on this thread, I own the first comment and no others.
I just want you to know I am still a regular observer here. Thanks for your continued thoughts and consideration of Viet Nam Veterans and the military generally.
And thanks for thinking of me in particular. You have my support and respect.
Allan Yackey
Robert is a perfect example of the liberal dishonesty: what is the big deal smearing our military with words and praising the terrorists as freedom fighters. What ‘s the big deal? At the same time we should cut and run before the terrorists. We haven’t heard a beep from the liberal left about the Australian Islamic multi justifying the raping of women without proper Islamic clothing.
The liberal left is so dishonest. I wonder why people can still support them.
Yee-hah!!!
Robert is a perfect example of the liberal dishonesty: what is the big deal smearing our military with words and praising the terrorists as freedom fighters.
And who was it Reagan called “freedom fighters”? Right: Osama bin Yo Mama and his merry band of pragmatic desert Republicans.
And who was it Reagan called “freedom fighters”? Right: Osama bin Yo Mama and his merry band of pragmatic desert Republicans.
————————————————
I didn’t know Osama was fighting the communists at that time. FOr liberals, fighting the invading communists is not freedom fighter. But blowing up Iraqui women and children is considered “freedom fighter”.
Thanks for another example of the dishonesty of the liberal left. AGain, the liberal left is so dishonest that I wonder why some people still support them.
BTW, this is such a cheap standard liberal spin. Are liberals condemning FDR for aligning with Stalin in fighting Hitler?
THe liberal left cannot be honest. They have to spin for the communists and now the terrroists. What a despicable movement! I cannot see how people with an ounce of brains can support the liberal left.
dr john,
As for your (Classic) MSM swipe:
If it was 1/100th as liberal as you think, Bush would have been out of a job over his deeply serious, grown-up, soldier supporting “Bring it on line”.
Bush: Moron or troop-hater?
Jay Tea,
I’m not a supporter of Kerry (of course, I did vote for him in 2004, but i’d have voted for a door jamb against Goofus Kahn).
They couldn’t find anyone to run against him in the early 90s either. So he ran against Mitt Romney.
Talk about your dearth of representation.
I wrote myself in for that one.
Robert,
IF you think Bush is a moron, then you must conclude that the liberal left is in the sewage (ie. way beyond being a moron). In other words, the liberal is really stupid for spinning for the terrorists, who will cut-off their heads if they have the chance. Also the liberal left is dishonest and despicable for supporting the communists and now the terrorists.
If you are honest you would spend much time disparaging Bush dishonestly as you have done while you have turned a blind eyes towards the moronic and despicable left. Again, if you have an ounce of brains you wouldn’t have done that in any case. Not even talk about an ounce of decency.
BTW Roberts, thanks for admitting that people who supported Kerry wouldn’t have an ounce of brains. That speaks volume of the liberals’ intelligence. I think they know that they are far more stupid than the moron Bush. That ‘s why they have to project their stupidity on Bush.
If Bush is stupid, then the liberals ‘s intelligence is in the sewage if we are honest.
Well how could he have been talking about Bush, because when they released his academic transcripts Kerry actually did worse at Yale than Bush did! Wouldn’t make much sense to insult somebody for being stupid or uneducated when they did better than you at the same school, right?