Hewitt - Bush-Cheney '04 has released a new television ad, titled "Worldview," as in "John Kerry's worldview." (The subject, coincidentally, of the Saturday-Sunday symposium, all entries into which appear below.) The new ad marks the beginning of the end-game, and it is going to be a very hard three weeks for John Kerry. Here's the text of the ad:
Script For "Worldview"
Voice Over:
"First, Kerry said defeating terrorism was really MORE about law enforcement and intelligence than a strong military operation.
More about law enforcement than a strong military?
Now Kerry says We have to get back to the place where terrorists are a nuisance like gambling and prostitution, we're never going to end them.
Terrorism, a nuisance?
How can Kerry protect us when he doesn't understand the threat?
President Bush: I'm George W. Bush and I approve this message."
I approve of this message too, because it is directed at the core issue of this campaign. John Neville Kerry just doesn't understand the enemy or the threat. You cannot defend against an enemy you cannot so, refuse to see, and refuse to understand. It is that simple.
If you need even more proof than Kerry himself provided in the first two debates, read today's New York Times Magazine article on him from which the "Worldview" nuisance quote is drawn. And Powerline's Scott Johnson's analysis of the article.
As the Times' article, Scott's analysis and the symposium submissions all show, Kerry's worldview is, well, other-worldly. It isn't even remotely anchored to the way the world works or our enemies think or act. It doesn't acknowledge the Iraq Study Group report's conclusions, the corruption in oil-for-food, the impotence of the French or Germans to help us even if they were inclined to do so which they are not, or the deadly and savage earnestness with which tens of thousands (at least) of Islamist fanatics intend great harm to the United States. Like Chamberlain's view of Hitler, Kerry's view of today's enemy is 100% wrong. Kerry's view of American resolve and purpose is nearly as wrong as well.
In the most revealing of the many outlandish statements by Kerry in today's Times piece, at least as damning as the "nuisance" quote, Kerry says:
"But it's a different kind of war. You have to understand that this is not the sands of Iwo Jima. This is a completely new, different kind of war from any we've fought previously.''
I am not sure how that statement will be received in the Marines' quarters around Fallujah or with the 1rst Infantry Division's encampment near Samarra, but Kerry's declaration that frontal assaults on territory occupied by the enemy are not part of the GWOT is at best surreal. What a naive view of the war. The GWOT has many aspects, and it already has had many fierce battles, equal in intensity though not American loss of life to Iwo Jima. In fact, it is hard to square Kerry's repeated condemnation of Bush Administration tactics at Tora Bora with Kerry's rejection of Iwo Jima-like battles in the current war. Kerry's understanding of the war is, in a word, incoherent, but no doubt welcome in places like Teheran and Damascus as it appears to rule out any future major battles no matter what those states do or which terrorists they support.
And his candidacy is doomed as a result. A nuisance, for which no Iwo Jimas will be necessary. What a maroon.
HERE ARE THE ADS - georgewbush.com |
