Reply #82: Gee, to read that headline... [View All]

[thebigthink]

... a person might almost think Kerry was talking about this war. If you ask me, that should raise a flag about the author's motivations and intentions right off the bat.

I would also tend to disagree with the author's conclusion that this statement:

"As a veteran of both the Vietnam War and the Vietnam protest movement, I say to both conservative and liberal misinterpretations of that war that it's time to get over it and recognize it as an exception, not as a ruling example, of the U.S. military engagements of the twentieth century. If those of us who carried the physical and emotional burdens of that conflict can regain perspective and move on, so can those whose involvement was vicarious or who knew nothing of the war other than ideology and legend."

Could reasonably be interpreted to mean Mr. Kerry believes that:

"...it's time we stop questioning U.S. foreign policy intentions"

The supposed "neo-con" connection is pretty weak too, when the cherry-picked quotes used to attempt to draw it are taken in context. Mr. Hand writes:

On page 40 of In A Call to Service, Kerry writes: "The time has come to renew that tradition and revive a bold vision of progressive internationalism." What is this tradition to which Kerry refers? As he describes it, Democrats need to honor "the tough-minded strategy of international engagement and leadership forged by Wilson and Roosevelt in the two world wars and championed by Truman and Kennedy in the cold war."

Here is the entire paragraph from which the "tough-minded strategy" quote was taken:

"Our tradition is defined by the tough-minded strategy of international engagement and leadership forged by Wilson and Roosevelt in the two world wars and championed by Truman and Kennedy in the cold war. They recognized that America's security depended not on going it alone but on our capacity to rally the forces of freedom. And they understood that that to make the world safe for democracy, we needed to build international institutions dedicated to establishing the rule of law over totalitarianism and anarchy. That's why Roosevelt pushed hard for the United Nations, the World Bank, and the IMF. It's why Truman insisted not only on creating NATO and resisting Communist insurgencies, but also on the Marshall Plan to speed Europe's recovery. It's why Kennedy not only faced down the Soviet Union over nuclear missiles in Cuba but also signed the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and launched the Peace Corps."

I have to tell you, I don't think I really have a problem with the Peace Corps, the UN, the IMF, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty or the Marshall Plan. In my book, these were all good ideas.

Conclusion:

I could go on and debunk the rest of the article, but why bother. The obvious lesson here, and it's one we should all take to heart, is that there are people on the left who are every bit as willing to use distortion and lies to make their case as anyone on the right. Beware anyone who believes that any means whatsoever are justified by their ends.

The only question I have is, when a guy named Hand does a smear job, does that make it a "Hand Job?"