John Kerry's Trojan Horse

This is an appeal to Democrats and Liberals to finally recognize that John Kerry has aligned them with radicals and criminals of the worst sort. Firstly, we should not fear the ideas of the radical protestors positioned against George Bush during the Republican Convention. Many of the actual people on the street are neighborhood gang members, college kids on a date or teenagers out for a thrill. Many of them don't know who Dick Cheney is, nor can they verbalize one single policy of George Bush with which they disagree. They are merely fodder for the cameras, kids who will have to deal with the real world eventually, but not now. They are just having fun. However, the leaders that are using them are a different case and I believe they are taking their marching orders (somehow and in some way) from John Kerry. I've heard that some of these demonstrators are funded by the Tides Foundation and Teresa Heinz Kerry. They appear to represent a network of some very bad types (according to press reports) such as violent anarchists, terrorists and revolutionary communists who still want to take over this country and are using Kerry to regain the limelight and continue their struggle. Someone is paying for these hotel rooms and meals and travel expenses.

We must recognize that the media-made protestors are not an indication of a ground swell of opposition to Bush but of a desperate attempt to resurrect the old socialist/communist radical bases, to use the old "structure vs. superstructure" anti-establishment (college trained), "don't trust anyone over thirty-five" methods of protest to gain a foothold for radicals who will later function as Kerry's storm troopers. It is obvious that these radicals and criminals are now in charge of the Democratic Party and their presence on the scene represents an alliance that Kerry has made with them - criminals can be very helpful because they are ruthless and will do anything you want them to do. Just as you cannot believe that their opposition to the Swift Boat Vets means an opposition to actual lies told by Democratic 527 groups or Michael Moore style propaganda and character assassination, you cannot believe that Kerry radicals won't privately countenance violence by radical groups and try to use it for political advantage.

But Kerry and the radicals are mistaken about the viability of their methods. The media gives the radicals of the '60s credit for defeating the war in Vietnam; but these people were merely flies on the paper stuck in their ideology, puffed up media creations, hyped-up public relations mouth pieces for the communists who, like Kerry, supported the Russian-armed North Vietnamese dictators. The American people realized during the '60s that Vietnam was not in our strategic interest and it is they, not the radicals, who forced a change by electing Richard Nixon who promised to end the war. Kerry cannot be dissociated from these later-day protesters and the upcoming deliberate violence that is planned in order to gain attention and embarrass the Republicans. The coming violent tactics only reveal the revolutionary source of Kerry's candidacy. And as was done in '69, the media attention given to these crazies will do the most harm to those with whom they are most closely associated ideologically - and that is Kerry. When the American people see them on television spouting their revolutionary rhetoric, they will not hate the police. They will wonder about Kerry not Bush. And the media will not even mention the impact that the violent radicals will have on Kerry's sinking poll numbers.

Kerry is a Trojan Horse and these protesters are the hidden soldiers, the storm troopers of Kerry's planned dictatorship, the people that will turn this country inside-out in an orgy of mindless "ownership" of the soon to be enslaved American people. In a time when most Americans are concerned about security and fighting the war on terror, these radicals have come out of the woodwork - they have no place in the national debate because they, like Kerry are out of time and place. Yet, somehow (and with someone's assistance?) they have been presented to the American public as participants in this electoral event. Where were they during the last 35 years and why are they now gaining a new voice? The answer is John Kerry. I believe they are part of an orchestrated strategy put together by very rich supporters and the Democratic Party leadership to deceive the American people - to use the trappings of "legitimate" protest, the myth of Kerry's heroism and "manliness" and a totalitarian propaganda machine to take over the government - not to "win" an election, but to steal this election by any means and at any cost. Those "mainstream" Democrats that still value "democratic" processes should take heed and realize that the Democratic Party has deserted them and no longer represents a viable alternative to the Republicans. It is time for a new party, a party divorced from "revolutionary" roots and archaic notions of vote-buying pandering.

After 9/11, Democrats should have recognized the need to remove the influences from their party that contributed to our weakened ability to fight terrorism and recognize that, as of today, George Bush represents both Republicans and honest Democrats. As someone who disagrees with George Bush on most major issues, I do not see a viable opposition in the Democratic Party as it has presented itself in this election. For a candidate who has presented himself, not only as a war criminal and a critic of war crimes and as a war hero is a baffling proposition. That such a person can even be considered a viable leader in a war for our very survival makes me wonder where we, as a society, took the wrong turn. That well-meaning and thoughtful people can perform the types of intellectual contortions that allow them to drop the context of reality and rationalize into non-existence the credibility of George Bush as a war time leader, then to twist themselves intellectually to rationalize into non-existence the utter non-credibility of John Kerry is a mystery for the ages. There is no sanity in that proposition. It only proves the power of lies to support a myth.

We must understand the "role" of violence in political movements. In a free society, violence is used as a precursor of dictatorship to intimidate law-abiding citizens who would be harmed if they disagree with brutality and illicit domination. It is never a "valid" means of protest. Free people do not protest violently. They don't need to. They have an electoral process and free speech in order to effect change when necessary. Only those who intend to "take over," who know that people would not willingly vote them in would use violence to silence and intimidate opposition. Violence is used by gang leaders to operate their "protection" rackets and eliminate opposition to their extortions and thefts. You cannot convince a law-abiding citizen that it is ok to practice violence on the streets. But through violence you can intimidate and scare people into acquiescence in illegal practices. Violence requires criminality, a belief that honest people are suckers and deserve to be beaten and robbed. Or should I say criminality is violence; a destruction of individual rights and civil process. This is what we will be presented with in the coming weeks by those who support John Kerry.

The radical left that supports Kerry was repudiated by the fall of the Soviet Union and the defeat of communism (their basic philosophy). Silencing Swift Boat Veterans is the tip of the iceberg of what Kerry will do to destroy opposition to gain and keep power. In fact, the Swift Boat Vets have become the one factor that could defeat Kerry's overall strategy to use criminals, leftist radicals, propaganda and lies to "take over" (which explains the utter desperation of the Democrats and the media over the Vets and why they need to squash the debate by any means especially by discrediting the Vets before too many people realize there is a solid basis to their charges). Violent criminals and the radical left will be the soldiers who will be let loose on our streets to intimidate or silence dissenting voices. That is what Kerry brings to this election (everything he has done indicates it: his alliance with criminals, his efforts to legally silence opposition, his use of Michael Moore-style propaganda and the "Big Lie," his class-warfare hatred of the rich to name a few) and we should be afraid, very afraid of a Kerry presidency.

We must put things in perspective. I disagree with Bush on abortion, the separation of church and state, government spending and faith-based welfare to name just a few...but I do not disagree with him on getting rid of Al Queda and terrorism. We need to do that before we can straighten Mr. Bush out on the other issues. The most important issue of this election, indeed the most important issue of our generation, is whether freedom will survive in a world that is growing increasingly hostile and violent toward it. There can be only one answer to the question of which leader has proven he is a viable fighter for freedom and capable of winning this war. To drop the context and say that abortion issues are more important or that health care is more important or even jobs are more important is to loose the perspective that says in order to be able to squabble about these issues we must first be secure. Kerry has said that we should not take any military action anywhere in the world without the consent of the United Nations. That is simply un-American and completely myopic. He cannot lead effectively with that view.

See below for a selection of my works available for sale:

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