John Kerry's Own Party Is Criticizing His Approach To The War On Terror

In An Effort To Distance Himself From John Kerry, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle Is Running An Advertisement For His Senate Reelection Campaign With Footage Of Him Hugging President Bush. “Despite Republicans' occasional calls for greater bipartisanship, some think Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) has gone way overboard in his latest TV campaign ad. The 60-second spot shows Daschle and President Bush embracing on the House floor the day Bush addressed Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks…. [John] Thune, meeting with reporters here Tuesday, called the ad ‘complete hypocrisy’ and ‘a farcical ploy.’ He said it suggests Daschle's campaign is slipping in a state where Republicans easily outnumber Democrats and Bush is expected to win easily. The Republican National Committee called on Daschle to stop running the ad.” (Brian Faler, “Adding Insults To Injuries,” The Washington Post, 9/1/04)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi "Can't Understand" John Kerry's Position On Iraq. "Calling President Bush's invasion of Iraq 'a grotesque mistake,' Nancy Pelosi, the highest-ranking Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, said in Las Vegas Wednesday that she can't understand why John Kerry has said he still would have 'voted to give the president the authority to go to war' even had he known there were no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, Bush's original justification for war." (Paul Harasim, "Pelosi visits LV to support Gallagher," Las Vegas Review-Journal, 8/26/04)

John Kerry’s Record Of Voting Against Our Troops

Senators Kerry And Edwards Are Two Of Only Four US Senators Who Voted For The Use Of Force Resolution Against Iraq And Against The $87 Billion Supplemental Supporting Our Troops.

Kerry Originally Said It Would Be “Irresponsible” To Vote Against Funding Troops.
In Trying To Defend His Vote Against The $87 Billion, Kerry Said, “I Actually Voted For The $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It.”

Kerry Later Said He Was “Proud” That He And Edwards Voted Against The $87 Billion In Funding For U.S. Soldiers And That His Vote Was “Complicated.” There is nothing complicated about voting to fund our troops in the field.

Kerry Even Said His Vote For The War And Against Funding For Our Troops Was “Not A Flip-Flop.”

Kerry Recently Pledged To Reduce The Number Of Troops In Iraq Within His First Six Months In Office. This is the wrong message to send to our allies and the people who enjoy freedom in Iraq.

Kerry Has Mocked Our Coalition Of Allies In Iraq As “Coerced” And “Bribed.”

Kerry's Troubling Record On The War On Terror

Kerry Implied That Force Is Only Required After A Terrorist Attack: “Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response.” (Sen. John Kerry, Nomination Acceptance Speech, Boston, MA, 7/29/04)

Kerry Believes The War On Terror Is Far Less A Military Operation And Far More A Law-Enforcement And Intelligence Gathering Operation.

While Serving On The Senate Intelligence Committee, Kerry Missed 76 Percent Of The Public Intelligence Committee Hearings.

In 1994, One Year After The First World Trade Center Bombing, Kerry Proposed An Amendment To Cut Intel By $6 Billion Over Six Years. Fortunately, 75 Senators, including Sen. Ted Kennedy voted against Kerry's amendment.

Chairman Of The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), Speaker Of The House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) And Others Have Said Kerry And Edwards Should Ask For The Release Of Their Attendance Records At Public And Private Hearings.

The revolutionary plan is as conservative as it is beneficial. The condescending liberal who asked Keyes a question about his plan made a slighting reference to multimillionaire Oprah Winfrey; why add to her income in this way? Keyes turned the question around. Because of 400 years of slavery, segregation and discrimination -- including 100 years of slavery under the aegis of the U.S. government -- how many latent Oprah Winfreys were stifled because of the doors slammed in their faces? Thus the answer isn't that it's wrong to make Winfrey richer, it is to create more Winfreys, which freedom from the income tax assuredly would do.

Keyes made it plain that there are conservatives who oppose his plan. To them he asked: How many of you have urged tax breaks for giant corporations, saying that such breaks would invigorate the economy? How can you not see the benefit of my version of reparations? Gradually, conservatives are beginning to understand. Heretofore, they have understood reparations as taking money from someone's pocket and putting it in another's pocket. Not so the Keyes plan.

Is the black community biased against the GOP? Of course. Not a single African-American columnist or commentator has given it much mention, much less praise. The Chicago Defender blasted Keyes for not using the stale Democratic liberal mantra. Reason: Blacks were delivered to the Democratic Party by the enticement of Democrat pols who still profit by exploiting poverty, promising federal handouts that don't work. Nothing much has changed since old Bill Dawson with his wooden leg ruled the South Side. Sure, Dawson's dead, but the white establishment saw to it that a tag team of Dem opportunists took his place. The decision to sell the Rev. Jesse Jackson as a leader was made largely by the white media.

Now Jackson is old hat, Rev. Al Sharpton is an embarrassment and the white establishment has chosen Barack Obama. An average state senator with views that were outside the mainstream, he was given the extreme makeover by his adviser David Axelrod. Make no mistake: Obama is groomed to be the establishment's first black president, running in the future as veep, then on his own. The first step was to get him the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention. Did you listen carefully to the keynote? The speech was vanilla. That's the way the Democratic establishment wanted it.

Put Obama next to Keyes in a debate and see him wilt. Axelrod knows that Keyes has debated them all: Senators Orrin Hatch, Phil Gramm, John McCain, and no one said Keyes didn't belong in that company. Obama isn't willing to keep his earlier pledge to debate six times because Axelrod knows that his client wouldn't be on the ticket if Blair Hull hadn't hit his wife's shin to keep her from kicking him. It's one thing for Obama and Axelrod to play it safe; it's another for the black community -- and commentators -- to swallow the Axelrod playbook without the slightest murmur of independence.

Obama isn't only afraid to debate Keyes; he was afraid to debate Steve Rauschenberger. Do you wonder why when Obama is under political fire the response usually comes from Rahm Emanuel or Don Rose? Or Axelrod? He's protected like a hothouse plant.

It all started earlier this week when Keyes gave a radio interview in which he expressed support for a proposed amendment to the Constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

"The essence of ... family life remains procreation," he explained. "If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

Now, if you read news reports of Keyes' remarks, you might be surprised right now about his comments.

If you tuned in any of the talking-head shows, you probably thought he called Mary Cheney, daughter of the vice president, a selfish hedonist because she is reportedly a lesbian.

If you heard any discussion of this quote anywhere in the establishment media, you might think he said that anyone who is a homosexual is, by definition, a "selfish hedonist."

Even if you carefully read accounts of this interview in "mainstream" press sources, you might even think he condemned Mary Cheney as a sinner.

It's not surprising you got that impression. Here is a sampling of the way various major news organizations covered his remark:

Los Angeles Times: "On Tuesday, Alan Keyes, the Republican Senate candidate in Illinois, denounced gays as 'selfish hedonists.' Asked whether that applied to Mary Cheney, Keyes replied, 'That goes by definition. Of course, she is.'"

Associated Press: "Illinois Republican Senate candidate Alan Keyes labeled homosexuality 'selfish hedonism' and said Vice President Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter is a sinner."

Washington Post: "Further tension erupted yesterday when Illinois Senate candidate Alan Keyes called Mary Cheney a 'selfish hedonist.'"
This is the way a determined, aggressive, partisan, biased pack of jackals cover someone they consider a real threat.

Alan Keyes is a black man who doesn't dance in their minstrel show. Keyes is a thinker who is not afraid to say what's on his mind and on his heart. Keyes is one of the most politically incorrect men in America.

Worse yet, right now Keyes is challenging one of the new darlings of the establishment press – Barack Obama, a conventional, "safe" black man who does what he's told and lives on the Democratic Party plantation.

But this is slanderous distortion. This is mean-spirited deception. This is character assassination, and it insults the intelligence of every American when my colleagues get away with this kind of mind control.

Alan Keyes didn't say all homosexuals were selfish hedonists. Read the quote again: "The essence of ... family life remains procreation. If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."

He said those promoting same-sex marriage are advocating a lifestyle choice based on selfish hedonism. This may seem like splitting hairs to those embracing the same-sex marriage program – as most of my colleagues in the press do. However, they are two entirely different statements. Every major news organization in the world unfairly accused Alan Keyes of saying something he didn't say. In other words, they lied. They lied big time. They twisted. They distorted. They even put words in his mouth.

Further, it wasn't Alan Keyes who uttered the name of Mary Cheney. It was the interviewer. He asked whether or not the universal rule Keyes laid out applied to Mary Cheney. He said yes, because it applies to anyone and everyone who takes the position that same-sex marriage is OK. He didn't condemn her as a sinner. That was an invention of the Associated Press, the largest news-gathering organization in the world, which disseminated this fabrication all over the planet to thousands of other news organizations.

Guess what? What Alan Keyes said in that interview is 100 percent correct. I may very well be the only commentator who has the guts to say it, but say it I will.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND and a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. He is also the founder of WND Books. In addition to his daily column in WND, he writes a nationally syndicated weekly column available to U.S. newspapers through Creators Syndicate.

==>Alan Keyes