March 01, 2004


The candidate who wouldn't "support the president to proceed unilaterally" against Iraq has transformed into a Haitian hawk:

Kerry (D-Mass.) said he would have sent troops to Haiti even without international support to quell the revolt against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

"President Kerry would never have allowed that to get where it is," Kerry said, though he added he's not "a big Aristide fan."

A Kerry administration would have given the rebels a 48-hour ultimatum to come up with a peaceful agreement - "otherwise, we're coming in," he said.

"I would intervene with the international community, and absent an international force, I'd do it unilaterally," he said, adding the most important thing was to protect democracy.

You’d think all that Botox would’ve frozen a few thoughts in place; instead, they flop around inside Kerry’s head like dying bats. He’s quite the inspirational speaker, too, as James Lileks points out. How’s this for a line to rally the nation:

God has been on our side through most of our existence.

That’s the southern vote sewn up.

UPDATE. Mark Steyn on the nuancy boy:

If you've gone over to the forces of nuance, Kerry's your guy - or your nuancy boy. He's got nuances coming out of his nuances. As the New York Times put it in its endorsement of the Senator: "What his critics see as an inability to take strong, clear positions seems to us to reflect his appreciation that life is not simple. He understands the nuances."

That may be the most lethal endorsement since Al Gore leapt on the Howard Dean bandwagon and sent it careering into the ravine.

Posted by Tim Blair at March 1, 2004 11:36 PM

Cripes! One could be forgiven for thinking that the missing WMD entered Kerry's body through his facial dermis, briefly reviving his sagging face, then chewed it's way through his skull and munched contentedly on his brain. How else to explain these ravings?

Posted by: Tongue Boy at March 1, 2004 at 11:52 PM

After the election, we can look back to that single answer an know exactly when J F-ing Kerry lost.

Posted by: Doc at March 2, 2004 at 12:41 AM

so he's a unilateralist, but only in former french colonies. look out, ivory coast!

Posted by: Mr. Bingley at March 2, 2004 at 01:04 AM

Krauthammer had an article that contained the opinion that the left likes intervening only when we have no interests.

This seems to fit the pattern.

Posted by: Ron at March 2, 2004 at 01:37 AM

Just wanted to emphasize a quote from Lilek's column that's brilliant

One more question: take these two statements:

“The liberty we prize is not American's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity.”


“We pray that God is on our side, and we pray hard. And God has been on our side through most of our existence.”

Which one best represents the face of America you’d like the President to show to the world?

Posted by: Cool Tester at March 2, 2004 at 01:45 AM

Why am I not surprised that Kerry would support further propping up a Marxist?

The CommIntern is alive and well. It's no longer controlled by the Soviets, but still thriving.

Posted by: Mike Rentner at March 2, 2004 at 01:58 AM

Jeebus H. wept. Lemme get this straight - Kerry won't send troops to Iraq, where they would overthrow a murderous dictator, but would send them to Haiti in order to protect a murderous dictator.

Given Kerry's inveterate fudging of every position, I'm beginning to think his middle initial "F" stands for Fig Leaf. In this case, the fig leaf is "even though I don't like Aristide."

And whats that rot about propping up Aristide being the protection of democracy? Does anyone in the press ever ask Kerry a follow-up question? How would the Kerry "democracy doctrine" justify defending a dictator in Haiti, while refusing to overthrow one and jumpstart a democracy in Iraq?

And I used to think the Republicans were the stupid party. I'm back to thinking Bush in a landslide if he runs against Kerry.

Posted by: R C Dean at March 2, 2004 at 03:19 AM

Forget about Kerry's position on Haiti (or on anything; whatever position he takes, it's not going last long enough for us to comment). The question is why the dog didn't bark. Why didn't Jimmy and Bill bark? Where has the Carter Foundation been since Bill liberated Haiti? Why did they betray Aristide (or was it the other way around and Aristide took advantage of their naivete)?

Posted by: Edgardo at March 2, 2004 at 04:04 AM

I believe the solitary thing a president Kerry could be counted on to do, would be to be guided by the unerring principle of "What would France do?"

Posted by: recon at March 2, 2004 at 04:13 AM

Interesting, calling him President Kerry.....

Posted by: Just me at March 2, 2004 at 04:23 AM

Yet more evidence of Kerry's Viet Nam fixation. He's in favor of intervening to support a corrupt local government being challenged by a popular uprising. Haiti probably would not turn out to be like Viet Name, but it has a lot more superficial resemblance to it than does Iraq.

Tex the Pontificator

Posted by: Tex the Pontificator at March 2, 2004 at 05:36 AM

The hell with it. Let's just admit that Haiti is a dead loss, declare it a Defunct State, and turn the "formerly Haitian" land over to the Dominican Republic.

Voila. C'est fini...

Posted by: mojo at March 2, 2004 at 05:44 AM

"48-hour ultimatum...otherwise, we're coming in."

Such jingoistic cowboy talk frightens me.

Posted by: Mike M at March 2, 2004 at 05:55 AM

No blood for, uh, whatever the heck Haiti exports!

Posted by: Dave T. at March 2, 2004 at 05:57 AM

"Does anyone in the press ever ask Kerry a follow-up question?"


Posted by: Robert Crawford at March 2, 2004 at 06:16 AM

You're all missing it;

Jean-Bertrand Aristide was installed in that position by Bill Clinton. They each want him in office for the same reason.

Can any of you guess why that might be?

Posted by: Bithead at March 2, 2004 at 06:51 AM

Bithead, I'll bite. (Good pun?) What is it? I'm assuming Clinton figured to get some sex, but how many heiresses does Haiti have, anyway? And do any of them have more than $700M?

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at March 2, 2004 at 07:01 AM

No blood for baseball players!

Posted by: at March 2, 2004 at 07:26 AM

Another perfectly good chance to redeem themselves and the HUMAN SHIELDS blow it. I would think they'd like to prove they mean what they say. Heck, Iraq showed them to be wimps. They didn't stick around to be used as real human shields.

Haiti is a place that could use them. Mugabe's countrymen could use them also. I say it's time for them to pack up and ship out. Show the world they really WILL put their lives on the line to protect innocent lives.

Plenty of innocent lives at risk in both countries. A Human Shield's dream come true. I'll look forward to the online updates. With Mugabe, especially, lots of opportunity to "speak truth to power". Mugabe could use some truth being spoken to him.

There's also N. Korea, Cuba, and Sudan. The innocent people suffering under these regimes could use Human Shields *plus* "speaking truth to power". Go to it, Human Shields. Destiny awaits.
Gather your fellow activists. Stage some protests with those way-cool puppets. I'm sure the people will love ya for it. You may get killed, but I imagine Human Shields aren't afraid of that.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at March 2, 2004 at 07:27 AM
"President Kerry would never have allowed that to get where it is," Kerry said, though he added he's not "a big Aristide fan."

Kerry is talking about himself in the third-person now? You know, Julius Caesar used to do that when writing about his exploits in the Gallic Wars. And Cicero rightly judged him a meglomaniac.

Posted by: Mike Jericho at March 2, 2004 at 08:08 AM

"God has been on our side through most of our existence"?

Why only "most"? Is Kerry implying that God has abandoned us since Bush was elected?

Posted by: Eric Scheie at March 2, 2004 at 08:26 AM

"President Kerry would never have allowed that to get where it is..."

That should be: "President Kerry(sick)..."

Not the grammatical (sic), but, the feeling in one's stomach at the thought of it.

Posted by: rinardman at March 2, 2004 at 09:02 AM

> Kerry is talking about himself in the third-person now?

Well, look what it did for Dole!

Posted by: Kirk Parker at March 2, 2004 at 09:26 AM

Kerry's biggest problem in 2004.

He waffles on an issue and then must avoid further mention of said issue to hide his flip-flop. It's only March 1, and the number of issues left is rapidly decreasing. By November, Kerry's going to be wildly concerned about the white-spotted polka-dot moth-eating wombat's apparent lack of endangered species status. "I encountered dozens of these fuzzy, cuddly creatures while on a swiftboat in Vietnam..."

Posted by: Bryan at March 2, 2004 at 10:02 AM

If Bush sent troops into Haiti without a UN mandate, Kerry would have criticised him. You just can't please the Left. Bush is damned if his does, damned if he doesn't!

Posted by: Jessica Porter at March 2, 2004 at 10:05 AM

Good lord. Haiti is... I'll tell you what Haiti is, Haiti is one of the best pieces of evidence that human beings are at nature depraved and violent, and that if there were nothing left of the world to fight over but a single piece of damp, 2-inch-square moldy cardboard we would start a war over it. Leaving aside whatever attractions a homeland has for the people native to it, Haiti has absolutely nothing in the way of natural resources or strategic importance worth fighting for. So, of course, sending troops to quell some pathetically thuggish "uprising" (I'd call it a "downrising," considering the quality of both sides of the "struggle") in that land attracts the leftish contingent, who like nothing more than a battle they can lose (because you can't "win" in a country like Haiti unless you are willing to break a lot of heads, and we ain't) in order to suffer ostentatiously about how "hopeless" everything is.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 2, 2004 at 11:12 AM

By the way, I'd like to mention that any Haitian with any sense in his head gets out, or plans to get out, of that ton-ton-macoute-vs.-thuggish-dicator-riddled nuthouse as soon as he can. All of the Haitians I have met (they mostly head straight to Florida, of course) have been very resourceful, and tend to become successful. Once they get to a place with resources, that is.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 2, 2004 at 11:15 AM

The answer to what Kerry will talk about when he runs out of topics on which he has spoken on both sides is to point out that he fought in Viet Nam. He is already doing that as an answer to pretty much anything on Iraq, etc.

Posted by: Bruce Hayden at March 2, 2004 at 12:23 PM

Does John Howard have God on his side? In his recent response to a question about Mel Gibson's "The Passion of Christ", Grampah John said that "some of my colleagues have an understanding.." of the issues raised in the film. My advice to Mr Howard is to read the book rather than comment on the movie - he may then also get an understanding of a whole range of issues not related to movies, such as telling huge porkies about Iraq.

Posted by: Bill at March 2, 2004 at 01:22 PM


"President Kerry would never have allowed that to get where it is," Kerry said,


...though he added he's not "a big Aristide fan."

WTF does _that_ mean? And how come no one points
out the blatant contradiction in a single paragraph?

Not to mention, the tone. At once pompous and condescending. Al Gore in a bad wig.

Posted by: Timubc2 at March 2, 2004 at 01:39 PM

Kerry is on both sides of every issue, countless quotes prove this beyond all doubt. Except on one. Kerry says that terrorism is a law enforcemnet issue. He prefers to fight terorists with police and fireman and not the greatest military on earth. Jailing those who set off a car bomb at the World Trade Center did not stop them from coming back top finish the job now did it.

Posted by: North1776 at March 3, 2004 at 05:16 AM

No blood for, uh, whatever the heck Haiti exports!


Posted by: rosignol at March 3, 2004 at 06:21 AM

This is an issue because the congressional black caucus in Washington DC says it is. It is a an opportunity for the Democrats to tell Black Americans that Republicans are eeevvviiiiil!! Of course they don't quite come out and say it that way, it is implied. And then some idiot black activist types -Randall Robinson, JJ - start talking about how Aristide was "kidnapped", just to pile on. Most Americans would just assume Haiti sink to the bottom of the ocean and disappear - it is the most impoverished poor excuse for a country in the western hemisphere.

Posted by: JEM at March 3, 2004 at 06:48 AM