Mark Steyn's new column "Justifications for backing Kerry fall flat" is a hilarious breakdown of the various 'supporters' of Kerry:
...my Sun-Times colleagues, looking for a man they -- or, at any rate, Jacques Chirac and Kofi Annan -- can mold...
...the Des Moines Register, arguing that he doesn't seem like a wimp and a loser if you put him in a room full of even bigger wimps and losers....
...Honestly, sighs the Virginian Pilot, he only comes over like a snooty windbag because he's so much smarter than us...
...You're right, says the Washington Post, he has a commitment problem, but we'll work that out after the wedding....
Steyn moves on to question the veracity of the Dems screeching argument about how inept Bush was to let the weapons 'disappear' (those weapons that were never there and that Bush LIED about, remember?):
My version of this story -- they were smuggled out to Syria pre-invasion -- fits the Bush view of the war. But Kerry's version of this story undermines the Kerry view of the war -- or, at any rate, the most recent Kerry view of the war. That's the best clue as to the resolve he'd show as President: He has no internal conviction of his own, and so his campaign has run on incoherent reflex oppositionism, as, indeed, his Senate career has -- if America had followed the positions advocated by John Kerry, there would have been no Reagan arms build-up, and the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact would have lingered on, and their clients in Grenada would have destabilized the rest of the Caribbean, and Latin America would not have been democratized, and Saddam Hussein would still be in power and still controlling Kuwait. Kerry's lovebirds at the Washington Post et al. are dreaming of a transformation in their unlovely swain that would be at odds not just with his last three decades but with his last three weeks.
Steyn finishes with a very strong reminder that the Democratic Party of today is nothing more than an empty shell of what existed during the FDR era:
The Dems got a full tank from FDR, a top-up in the Civil Rights era, and they've been running on fumes for 30 years. Their last star, Bill Clinton, has no legacy because, deft as he was, his Democratic Party had no purpose other than as a vehicle for promoting his own indispensability...
And he is right on. The hollow accusations resonate with uneducated voters. Which is, by the way, exactly how the Democrats would leave them - uneducated...unable to take care of themselves...completely dependent on the huge bureaucracy that is going to be built with the tax increases if they get their way.
DR
