John Kerry: A Weak Sister?

John Kerry: A Weak Sister?
by Steve Finkelstein

weak sister n. Slang 1. A weak or undependable member of a group. 2. A person regarded as timid or indecisive.

Seven weeks remain for those chosen few who care enough to cast their ballots for the good old U.S.A.’s big Kahuna. As that ominous day draws near, I am growing more pessimitically cynical about the outcome (as opposed to my cynically pessimistic outlook toward the rest of life). Why so glum, you ask? Because it appears increasingly evident that George Bush is going to win a 2nd term come November 2nd. (As opposed to his first term,which he dubiously “appropriated.”) For those who don’t know me, lemme clue ya in: I despise George W. Bush. I find him to be a feeble-minded, right-wing extremist who will plunge this country into even direr straits when he starts his second term. For a more detailed explanation about why I loathe GWB, check out my article from August 5.

With most polls showing GWB’s approval rating at under 50%, and most folks thinking the country is on the wrong track, how could this possibly be happening? A large portion of the blame has to fall on the spinelessness of Bush’s opponent, John Kerry. When the Republican funded “front” group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, started maligning Kerry’s honorable Vietnam war service, he failed to hit back quickly or assertively enough. In the minds of some addle-pated voters, that created an image of Kerry as a liberal New England wuss, a Boston Brahman candidate who didn’t want to get his knuckles scraped in an alley fight. All this brings back a sense of déjà vu, when ANOTHER Democratic candidate from Massachusetts named Michael Dukakis thought political battles were fought according to the genteel Marquis de Queensbury rules. His loss to GWB’s daddy proved him wrong.

What Kerry and many Democrats fail to realize is that the Republican party feels that God is on its side. Hence, they feel they have the right to do or say ANYTHING to win elections, which includes smearing and lying about their opponents. It’s a perfect example of the ends justifying the means. All of this is strongly reinforced by the GOP’s right-wing “echo chamber”--talk radio and Fox News--which have been mercilessly pummeling Kerry. The effect of all of this is Kerry’s noticeable slippage in the polls. Even a pro-Kerry website shows him trailing Bush in the electoral count, which if you remember from the 2000 election, is more than a little important. It’s this lack of assertiveness, combined with Kerry not taking a firm enough stand against the Iraq war, that has cost him. The polling data shows there is public dissatisfaction with Bush’s Presidency. People want change in the White House; they just don’t think that Kerry is a viable alternative.

It’s not all Kerry’s fault, however. Part of the blame lies with the voting public. What can be done when the electorate believes Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11? Or when a majority of these voters now support the war in Iraq? Are a percentage of these voters so pliable they were suddenly swayed by the propaganda coming out of the Republican National Convention? They are like sheep, getting their news spoon-fed to them by talk radio and Fox News. To sum up my thoughts on this subject, let me quote that great cynic-journalist H.L. Mencken: “No one went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.”

Lest this jeremiad get you Kerry supporters down (I myself am one of them, hence my harsh critique of the Senator), I'll say Kerry is not totally finished. I give him a one in three chance of winning the election. Outside events (Iraq, the economy) could swing the polls back his way. The debates are also crucial. Bush only wants to have two debates; he wants to skip the third, which would be a town hall meeting among undecided voters. This is understandable on his part, as he would be in an “unscripted” environment. A similar situation occurred at a recent campaign stop, leading to his recent gaffe stating that, “Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country.” What Kerry needs is a forceful line, such as, “He ducked combat service and now he ducks a third debate--is this the character of a man you want as your President?”

Senator Kerry, puh-lease get your act together soon! The survival of this country depends on you. I do not mean this as alarmist hyperbole. The world is in very perilous shape, and many people agree that civilization cannot endure another four years of W.

See ya soon.

Steve can be reached at steve@babblog.com.