Good ole Traitor John! (part 2)

Retired Admiral, former Vietnam POW, and former Senator Jeremiah Denton weighs in with Who's Kerry?

Knowing that I served in the U.S. Senate with John Kerry and that, like him, I am a veteran of the Vietnam War, many people have asked me what I think of him, particularly now that he's the apparent presidential nominee of the Democratic Party.

When Kerry joined me in the Senate, I already knew about his record of defamatory remarks and behavior criticizing U.S. policy in Vietnam and the conduct of our military personnel there. I had learned in North Vietnamese prisons how much harm such statements caused.

To me, his remarks and behavior amounted to giving aid and comfort to our Vietnamese and Soviet enemies.

That's what it looks like to me too.

So I was not surprised when his subsequent overall voting pattern in the Senate was consistently detrimental to our national security.

Does a skunk smell?

Considering his demonstrated popularity during the Democratic primaries, I earnestly hope the American people will soberly consider Kerry's qualifications for the presidency in light of his position and record on both our cultural war at home and on national security issues.

To put it bluntly, John Kerry exemplifies the very reasons that I switched to the Republican Party. Like the majority in his political party, he has proven by his words and actions that his list of priorities -- his ideas on what most needs to be done to improve this country -- are almost opposite to my own.
...
As a nation, we are now at the point of no return. The good guys are finally angry enough to join the fray, and I pray we are not too late.

John Kerry is not among the good guys. The Democratic Party isn't, either.

Indeed, on the subject of national security, John Kerry epitomizes a fatal weakness in the Democratic Party.

During the decisive days of the Cold War, after the Democratic Party changed during the mid-1960s, the party was on the wrong side of every strategic debate on policy regarding Vietnam and the USSR, and is now generally on the wrong side in the war on terrorism.

The truth is that the Cold War was barely won by a narrow margin -- a victory and a margin determined by the political choices made by our government regarding suitable steps to deter Soviet attack and finally win the Cold War.

If the U.S. had followed the Democratic Party line, the Cold War would have concluded with the U.S. having to surrender without a fight, or the U.S. would have been defeated in a nuclear war with acceptable losses to the USSR.

It was not Johnson and Carter and the Democrats; it was Nixon, Reagan, George Bush and the Republicans who led us to victory in the Cold War.

And George W. Bush and the Republican majority -- not John Kerry and the Democrats -- can lead us to victory in the war on terrorism.

The fact is that the Democrat party at the national level has been taken over by USA loathing leftists of the most pernicious type. The good news is that they don't have the Soviet Union and China to ally themselves with anymore. The bad news is that they will pal around with any Third World thug they can find.