And now...the conclusion of my reactions to selected portions of Zell Miller's RNC speech...

And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.

Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that is now winning the War on Terror.

Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.

Yes, the facts.  Let’s start with those…like the fact that none of the weapons systems listed below ever came up for a vote in the Senate, or in any committee that Kerry served on, so saying that he voted against them is disingenuous at best.

 Instead, what Kerry voted against were a couple of appropriations bills, one in 1990, and one in 1995.  This was during a time when Dick Cheney himself was slashing the military budget, and taking congress to task for not slashing it even more.

The money was earmarked to be spent on all of these things, but even Cheney didn’t think they were necessary.  In fact, George Bush’s daddy  wanted cuts made to the military, and viewed them as prudent.

I remember how giddy EVERYONE was about the peace dividend…liberals and conservatives alike.  There was a general belief that we simply didn’t need the same massive level of military spending that we had during the cold war.

Kerry never specifically voted against the existence, development or military possession of any of these systems.  He didn’t vote to weaken or undermine our military force.  Instead, he voted against appropriations for the military that would have increased the expenditures of the military over and above an amount that Dick Cheney himself complained was an already bloated defense budget.  He voted for the leaner, tighter military for the future, rather than the larger, bulkier, military of scale that was the downfall of the Soviet Union.

It is the assertion of most Republicans that we won the cold war by outspending and outlasting the Soviet Union.  We won by economy of scale…and once they collapsed, that scale was no longer considered necessary.  Therefore, funding was cut back.  Lots of people on both sides of the aisle voted for those cuts, and the Republicans took the credit for the fact that he cuts were both possible and necessary.

Now, they decry Kerry’s support for that decision, at the same time that they claim he is incapable of bipartisan politics.  Oh the irony.

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.

I could go on and on and on: against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile; against, against, against.

This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?

U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?

Ya know, Zell?  I’m guessing that if one of Cheney’s buddies in the defense industry could find a way to sell a trainload of spitballs to the military, he would do it in one single beat of his cold, black heart.  Think of the profits…they cost all most nothing to make, and with a no-bid contract, you could mark them up to probably a couple hundred dollars each…I wonder if there’s ANY possible way to get a no-bid contract with this administration and have the details kept secret?

OK, I know that was silly…but so is what you said.  We’re even.

John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.  That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all.

How many of our occupational forces under this administration are private contractors?  Is it really that dangerous?  Surely our current administration would never outsource our national security, if it is as dangerous as you say.

Here's another link that discusses the outsourcing to private contractors, and it's dangers:  http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=issues&htmlId=986

This politician wants to be leader of the free world.

Free for how long?

Actually, that is a valid question to ask of the current administration.  How long are we going to have freedom of assembly?  Freedom of speech?  How many registered voters are going to have their votes thrown out in the next election?  (And I’m not talking about “chads” here…I’m talking about “cleansing” of voter roles, and shutting down the streets leading to polling places in historically Democratic areas…like what happened in Florida in 2000, and got little to no coverage)

How long are we going to be able to say that we live in a country where citizens and legal residents can’t be just arrested and held indefinitely without being informed of the charges, and without access to a lawyer?  Oh…wait…

George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.

And no matter how many threats he has to think up, I know we can count on him to develop a new strategy for every single one of them…but WMD’s worked so well.  I bet we don’t find any new threats for a long time…we’ll just discover the same ones in new places.

John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday's war. George Bush believes we have to fight today's war and be ready for tomorrow's challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of forces it takes to root out terrorists.

No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.

George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.

From John Kerry, they get a "yes-no-maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.

Wait.  Did you say friends?  We still have friends?

I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man. I am moved by the respect he shows the first lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.

Yes.  Very admirable…and that differs from Kerry how, exactly?

I can identify with someone who has lived that line in "Amazing Grace," "Was blind, but now I see," and I like the fact that he's the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.

And that sets him apart from Kerry how?  I mean, I’m sure that Kerry has had some dark nights of the soul.  I mean, he may not have lost most of his youth in a drug-and-alcohol frenzy, but I’m sure that he has grown as a spiritual person somehow.  Just because he didn’t have to claw his way up from being a frat boy doesn’t mean he hasn’t had a spiritual journey.

He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.

I agree.  I’d like to hear a lot more about George W. Bush’s deeds.  Let’s hear about how his courage and conviction were tested and tempered in battle…or maybe how his principles led him to make the difficult decision to not allow power and privilege to get him out of his civic duty…a heartwarming story about how one person actually saw him report for duty once

Hell, make something up involving honesty and a cherry tree…anything.

(Editor's notes:  I have recently read an article in the New York Times where the reporter says he talked to someone who actually did serve with the President, and had some good stuff to say about his performance...at least initially.  http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/opinion/15kris.html?th

Here's another link to another article on the same topic:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030411.html

There is some indication that the President did serve some of his time honorably.  You may have to register for the Electronic New York Times to read the first article, but I would encourage you to do so.  It is free.  The second one should be easily accessible)

I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.

Seriously?  You “knocked on the door of his soul”?  Who are you, Jesus?  I mean, you have to admit, that’s a little over the top…

…spine of tempered steel…ya know who should run for president?  Wolverine.  HE’S got a whole SKELETON of Adamantium.  That’d be cool….oh wait.  He’s Canadian.  Can’t be President of the U.S. Shoot.

The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.

Dude, you OWN your family?  This is America.  It’s 2004. You can’t OWN people…even if they are related to you.

The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before us, we've got some hard choosing to do.

Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.

Faint-hearted indulgence?  You mean like an ideological adherence to the sorts of wild, inventive, irrational neoconservative principles that made the Enron disaster possible?  You mean like this whole speech?  You mean faint-hearted indulgence like pursuing the war in Iraq against all rationality and evidence?  You mean faint-hearted indulgence like voting for our current president because we are afraid and he assures us that the terrorists will win if we vote for the other guy, and everyone wants to believe that there is some magical formula that will keep us safe, and George W. Bush is willing to tell us that he’s the only one with the anawer?

No, of course you don’t mean that.  Just checking.

 This election will change forever the course of history, and that's not any history. It's our family's history.

Yeah, the stakes are high.  I get that.  That’s why your boy scares the heck out of me.

In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud to stand up with him.

I wish I could be.  I wish I could just forget that I have all these questions and thoughts and ideas that clash with everything the man stands for, and join you.  I want to believe that everything’s going to be OK.  I want to believe that the patriot Act hasn’t been used cynically to violate anyone’s rights.  I want to believe that Iraq posed a horrible threat, and that we are safer because of our actions there.  I want to believe that George W. Bush is the right man at the right time doing the right thing.  Believe me.  I’m a sci-fi - fantasy fan, and that theme hits me hard on an emotional level.

But I don’t believe it.  And George W. Bush doesn’t care that I don’t believe it, and he’s not even trying to convince me.  He’s just hammering away at whatever irrational, unsubstantiated message gets him the best poll numbers.

He’s not answering the questions that need to be answered to convince me, and that tells me that he doesn’t have any answers to those questions, and that tells me that he’s not the right man in the right place doing the right thing.  So he will not get my vote, unless he can change that.