At least we've got John Kerry on our side...

This sounds like it should be from The Onion, but it's actually from The Globe and Mail. (Obviously, that doesn't make it true, but...)

“We’re not going to war,” Mr. Kerry told reporters Monday after meeting with British Foreign Secretary William Hague in London. “We will be able to hold [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad accountable without engaging troops on the ground or any other prolonged kind of effort, in a very limited, very targeted, very short-term effort that degrades his capacity to deliver chemical weapons without assuming responsibility for Syria’s civil war. That is exactly what we are talking about doing; an unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.”

Of course, an "unbelievably small, limited kind of effort" is almost certain to produce an "unbelievably small, limited kind of result." Any results that aren't "unbelievably small [and] limited" are almost certainly going to be unintended results, and probably negative.

There's also this classic:

“The end of the conflict requires a political solution,” he said. “There is no military solution and we have no illusions about that.”

We know that there's "no military solution," so the obvious next step is an "unbelievably small, limited" military action, because "unbelievably small" military gestures are how we always get to political solutions.

Obviously, if you're going to pick John Kerry to be Secretary of State, you aren't going to do a good job managing foreign affairs. The next time John Kerry is right about anything will be the first. But this seems spectacularly wrong-headed, even for Kerry. "Yeah, we're going to attack, because we said we would, but we aren't actually going to do any damage because it will be a small attack, so it's just empty symbolism to show Assad that we're capable of empty symbolism, because otherwise, the President who drew that red line in the sand will look like a feckless idiot, rather than a strong leader, because nothing says strong leadership like telling people beforehand that your attack won't do anything useful."



It's hard to believe that this isn't selling well in the heartland, or even on Capitol Hill...

Why I oppose START

Honesty compels me to admit that I've not followed the details of the START treaty closely. But when John Kerry, a man who has been wrong on virtually every public policy issue in his lifetime, pushes for approval on the grounds that "this Congress has a chance to do something historic," well, that's all the grounds I need for opposition.

(Never mind the fact that it's going to pass after cutting off debate with the votes of seven or eight Senators who were voted out of office nearly two months ago...)

"Maybe you could teach him something..."

Out trick-or-treating with the kids, on Beacon Hill in Boston. For those that don't know, Beacon Hill is a small area behind the Massachusetts State House, with ... exclusive residents. Former GE CEO Jack Welch has a place on Beacon Hill. As does Massachusetts Senator John Kerry. Anyway, they close the streets to cars on Halloween, and it's like a huge block party. Many of the residents go all out in terms of decorations, and thousands of people in costumes crowd the streets.

My eleven year-old decided to go as that most horrifying of creatures - a politician! So he wore a suit and tie, and carried a sign saying, "Tired of all the other Senators? Vote for Ben!" He had a button on his lapel with Ben! and the GOP elephant. And three copies of that on his top hat.

So we get into Louisburg Square. And he's going door to door, half a block down from the Kerry Manse. And one of the neighbors asks him if he's seen the Senator yet.

Kerry Neighbor: "I like your costume. Have you been to John Kerry's house yet?"
Ben: "No."
Neighbor: "I think that he'd like your costume."
Ben: "I don't think he'd like my hat."
Neighbor: (Pauses, looks again at the hat) "No, but maybe you could teach him something."

An appropriate Kennedy memorial - more screwing of the taxpayers

One of the memorable moments during the 2004 Presidential Campaign was Zell Miller's brilliant speech at the Republican Convention, as he eviscerated John Kerry's opposition to virtually every recent weapon system or military platorm, culminating in that unforgettable line, "US Forces armed with what? Spitballs?" (starts about 30 seconds into this video):


Well, John Kerry has found some "defense spending" of which he approves:

A large military spending bill moving through Congress contains a little-noticed outlay for Boston that has nothing to do with national defense: $20 million for an educational institute honoring late Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts.

The earmark, tucked into the defense bill at the request of Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, requires US taxpayers to help the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate realize its goal of building a repository for Kennedy’s papers and an accompanying civic learning center on the University of Massachusetts at Boston campus in Dorchester, next to the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum.

...

Kerry strongly defended the insertion of the $20 million earmark yesterday. He requested that it be included in the $360 billion defense budget, he said, to recognize Kennedy’s long tenure on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

It seems like a hanging curve ball, but I confess that it leaves me speechless. How do you actually deconstruct or mock a statement as full of self-mocking arrogance and irony as that one? Ted Kennedy may have sat on the Armed Services Committee for years, but he did so while fighting against every expansion, improvement and use of the US military over that same period of time. There is no segment of the federal government for which Kennedy did not fight for increased funding except the military. The idea that US taxpayers should allocate defense funds¹ to provide a "repository for Kennedy’s papers" is so outrageous that I honestly can not find anything appropriate to say about it.



¹ - Realistically, it doesn't matter whether the money is allocated in a defense bill or a department of Education funding bill or HUD or anything else. Money is fungible, and if the government decides it's going to spend money on this, well, the taxpayers foot the bill. It's just impossible to conceive of a less appropriate bill in which to include this particular waste of taxpayer dollars.

The nicest thing I can say about John Kerry...

(Of course, the sad thing is, I'm much happier with him than I would be if he were actually accomplishing anything...)

Why was Kerry in Florida?

The tasering of a student at the University of Florida earlier this week took place at a talk being given by Massachusetts own John Kerry. What Chris wants to know is why was John Kerry there in the first place?
My response to that is, who cares? Let's just count our blessings that he was.

The less time John Kerry is in Washington doing his job, the better for the country. He can do far less damage droning to a group of college leftists in Florida than actually legislating.

And that goes for the rest of the Massachusetts congressional delegation as well...

"Seared, seared in my memory"

What's more fun than Being John Malkovich?

Mocking John Kerry...

Later, the professional Vietnam veteran expressed concern that the student’s freedom of speech had been squelched in "a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan…that is, if Mr. Khan had been able to buy a high-voltage stun gun."