Tags: Kerry | Unshakeably | Left-Wing

Kerry Unshakeably Left-Wing

Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:00 AM

Kerry, on the other hand, demonstrated that he is a “cafeteria Catholic.” He spoke of his being raised a Catholic and said his faith meant a great deal to him. Then he went out of his way to assure women that just because he is Catholic and just because the Catholic Church is against abortion he won’t impose the views of the Catholic Church on America.

If some pro-life Catholics were confused as to whom to vote for, since Kerry mentions that he is a Catholic frequently, Kerry’s reply should have been sufficient for them. Likewise when Schieffer asked Kerry about those Bishops who have gone so far as to suggest that Kerry should not be given Holy Communion in their diocese, Kerry said he respected their views, but then went on to give another cafeteria Catholic answer.

The President’s faith underlies all he does. That is why he has restored dignity and integrity to the White House. One goes with the other.

There has been no scandal during the Bush Presidency. Compare that record with the previous Administration. Yet all sorts of folks yearn for the return of the Clinton Era. They will likely get it if Kerry is elected. He said his mother’s dying words when he told her he was going to run for President were, “Integrity. Integrity. Integrity.” Perhaps there is a reason she had to say it three times.

John Kerry has been a liberal all of his public life.

His testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during which he indicted his fellow service men in Vietnam, claiming that they committed all sorts of unspeakable atrocities, was typical left-wing tripe. It turned out that the accusations were totally false.

The so-called Winter Soldier hearing conducted by Kerry and Jane Fonda had testimony from soldiers who claimed to have committed the atrocities. It later was proven that this testimony was false. Many of the men who testified never set foot in Vietnam. Others were nowhere near where they claimed to have committed or witnessed these terrible acts.

Our prisoners of war were beaten more severely as the result of what Kerry did. Yet has he ever apologized for his false indictment? Never. He never mentions it and it was skipped over at the Democrat National Convention.

Kerry was Lieutenant Governor to Michael Dukakis. You remember Dukakis? Bush 41 disposed of him very handily. When Kerry ran for the Senate, he campaigned on the platform of cutting back on defense spending because the money “could be better spent on social programs.”

Indeed, his maiden speech in the U.S. Senate was opposing President Reagan’s successful attempt to install the MX missile system in Europe, one of the factors that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Not only did Kerry oppose every weapons system which we have found useful in the first Gulf war, in Bosnia, in Afghanistan and in Iraq - including the B-1 bomber and B-2 stealth bomber, the F-14A and F-14D Tomcats, the F-15 Eagles, Aegis Air Defense Cruiser, Patriot missiles and Trident missile system - he voted more than 50 times against developing a missile defense system to properly defend this country.

It is not surprising to recall how sympathetic he was and how glowingly he spoke of Daniel Ortega, who was the Communist dictator of Nicaragua. In fact, Kerry and Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa (another far-left Senator) went to Nicaragua to gain information to oppose the Contras. Without the Contras the Communists might still be in power there.

Kerry spoke in the debates about the U.S. needing to pass some sort of vague international test. During the Gulf War the UN supported the action and President Bush 41 assembled a very impressive coalition of international forces. If ever there was a war that passed the sort of test Kerry spoke of it was the Gulf War. Yet Kerry voted against it.

Kerry’s recent comments that terrorism could be reduced to a nuisance such as prostitution not only show a profound misunderstanding of the war on terror but a sort of pacifism which is inappropriate for our age.

Kerry’s liberalism has not been confined to defense issues. On social issues he has the worst record in the U.S. Senate. Not only has he voted pro-abortion every chance he got (even against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act) but he was one of only 14 Senators to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act.

This was the bill that made it clear that the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution could not apply if a state recognized “homosexual marriage.” That bill is likely to be declared unconstitutional, which is why a Constitutional Amendment on marriage is needed. Kerry opposed it.

Kerry is against tuition tax credits for church schools. He opposes President Bush’s faith-based initiative. It is hard to find a social issue where he doesn’t take the wrong position.

If all the Catholic Bishops would follow the directive that came down from the Pope’s right-hand man, Cardinal Ratzinger, they would make it clear, as Archbishop Burke of St. Louis also has said, it is a sin to vote for a so-called Catholic politician who votes pro-abortion.

On economic issues his votes have been totally predictable over these past 20 years. If a measure provides for greater government control, he is for it. If a measure provides for greater federal spending, he is for it. If a measure provides for greater freedom for the individual, he is against it. That includes tax cuts. He says he voted in favor of tax cuts 600 times. I haven’t counted the votes but that seems a stretch. In any case all of these votes were for a smaller version of the tax cuts being proposed by various Presidents. But when it came to tax increases, such as Bill Clinton’s largest tax increase in history, he was all for it. Yes, he did support a Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget when Senator Paul Simon (D-Ill) was pushing for it. It didn’t pass, so it hasn’t mattered.

The President, on the other hand, has done more than any other President to promote the culture of life. In fact, greater progress for the pro-life cause has been achieved during this President’s watch then at any time since Roe vs. Wade: From the partial-birth abortion fight which so educated the public that a majority of Americans are pro-life, to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (the Lacey Peterson bill), which provides that if a pregnant woman is killed the murderer will be faced with two counts of murder. The unborn victim is a person under this statute.

Then there is the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. This provides that any child born alive, perhaps through a botched late-term abortion, is a person and cannot be put to death. Also there is the ban on human cloning and the re-instatement of the Mexico City Policy that denies federal funds to foreign non-governmental organizations that commit or promote abortion. That policy has been greatly expanded under President Bush.

Do the majority of Americans who now consider themselves pro-life really want to take the chance on someone who not only uncommitted to the culture of life but who has actually supported death by his votes?

The first duty of a President is to protect the country. The President has certainly done that. Since 9/11, there has been no attack. The President has stayed on the offense on the War on Terror.

Certainly what just happened in Afghanistan is a tribute to the President’s vision for that part of the world. Afghan citizens risked death threats and all sorts of other impediments in order to vote. It was an impressive showing.

The President believes that freedom and liberty are the antidote to terrorism. He is convinced that if Iraqis can vote in January and choose their own leadership, it will be a major step forward, which may permit some of our troops to come home.

Do voters, who surely want to see this country defended, really want to trade this President for a candidate who has opposed almost all of what the military has accomplished over these past two decades?

I am still more disturbed about John Kerry’s 1971 false testimony before Congress than I am about anything else. He was still in the military when he was conducting these anti-war activities. In fact, he went and met with North Vietnamese authorities while he was still serving in the Reserves. There is a word for that kind of activity but it has become unfashionable to use it.

I do not understand how voters could possibly elevate to the Presidency someone who engaged in these activities.

The Bush people have been far too polite. They have not used this issue. To me it is the central issue of our time. Surely the American people don’t want someone who functionally, if perhaps not legally, betrayed this country as President, do they?

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.


© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Kerry, on the other hand, demonstrated that he is a "cafeteria Catholic." He spoke of his being raised a Catholic and said his faith meant a great deal to him.Then he went out of his way to assure women that just because he is Catholic and just because the Catholic Church...
Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved