“John Kerry Hasn’t Supported Enough Wars to be Secretary of State”

If Susan Rice doesn’t become the next Secretary of State, the next most likely contender might be John Kerry.  Fortunately, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol has nipped that idea in the bud:  John Kerry hasn’t supported enough wars to be Secretary of State.

On Fox News, Bill Kristol said:

“I rather think [President Barack Obama] will appoint Susan Rice and I think — I’m not a huge fan of hers — but I think she’s likely to be confirmed by the Senate.  And an awful lot of people might decide, you know, given the range of alternative appointments, maybe she’s not — John Kerry, in my opinion, might be a worse secretary of state. Maybe one just goes ahead and lets him have the secretary of state he wants.  I think Susan Rice has been a little more interventionist than John Kerry.  John Kerry was a guy who loved the Assad regime in Syria. John Kerry has been against our intervening in every war we’ve intervened in, the first Gulf War. In Iraq, he was for it before he was against it.”

Somewhere underneath all that doddering and halting and rambling, Bill Kristol has a point.  We need a secretary of state who’s just champing at the bit to start a war.  And the more wars, the merrier.

In addition to being “against our intervening in every war we’ve intervened in,” John Kerry has an even larger blight on his record:  John Kerry himself has actually fought in a war (Vietnam).

Disqualified!  A true warmonger would never ever join the military and do his own fighting.  That’s for lowly working-class people, the unwashed masses, you know, blue-collar types.  The Secretary of State needs to be a foaming Neocon who loves war, but recoils in horror at the thought of actually taking part in it.

America’s Favorite Chicken Hawk Squawks Again

Bill Kristol says America should attack Iran. Once again, a sheltered trustfunded armchair warrior is ready to fight to the last drop of somebody else’s blood.

Appearing on Fox News yesterday, Kristol said:

“I think we have to have a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran. It would be much better if we used force against — to delay the Iranian nuclear program than if Israel did and there is no evidence that the US government is being at all serious about the use force there.”

Even if Iran were a threat to us — which it isn’t — Iran would not be the cakewalk that Iraq was. (Note to any conservatives reading this: the previous sentence was tongue-in-cheek.)

Iran is much stronger economically and militarily than Iraq was seven years ago. And given the West’s 60-year history of oppressing Iran (Google it), American soldiers would NOT be greeted as liberators, or showered with candy and ice cream by throngs of grateful Iranians.

Nina Easton mildly disagreed with Bill Kristol, but they both agreed that the Obama administration should “curry dissent” in Iran.

Yes, that worked out so well the first time we tried it, in the early 1950s, let’s do it again. And the coup that we engineered in Iran in the 1950s had absolutely nothing to do with the Iranian hostage crisis 25 years later. (Same “tongue-in-cheek” caveat as above, based on conservatives’ complete inability to grasp the cause-and-effect concept.)

Bill Kristol was asked if he himself would be willing to take part in this attack on Iran. Here was his response.

The Bow that Shook the Inbreds

The teabirther-chickenhawk brigade is taking a short break from their usual blubberings. They’ve got their panties in such a tight twist over Obama’s infamous bow in Japan, they’ve momentarily forgotten to yell and scream about “Death Panels!” and “Socialized Medicine!”

For now, the Far Right locksteppers are shrieking in unison that Obama is “apologizing for America!” “Groveling before our enemies!”

The knuckledraggers had the same mass hissyfit the last time Obama traveled overseas. For people with simple thought patterns, there are only two possibilities for the President of the United States when he’s visiting a foreign country. The correct choice of course is to thump your chest and yell out “America is Number One and don’t you forget it, you swarthy $#!%&$!#%&#$#$s!” If the president does anything other than that, what he’s actually doing is getting on his knees and groveling and begging for forgiveness. Sort of like what Michael Steele does every time he inadvertently offends Rush Limbaugh.

The expression “when in Rome…” probably doesn’t register with the retards who spend their lives sitting in their trailer watching Fox News. For everybody else — people in Japan bow. In India you don’t eat with your left hand. In Turkey and Iran you don’t use your thumb while hitchhiking because sticking out your thumb is their version of the middle finger. In England, if you mention something about a traffic circle or looking under the hood of your car, they won’t know what you’re talking about. And in Japan, you bow.

Bill Kristol, Bill Bennett and Karl Rove are among the rightfucks who have lashed out at Obama for bowing in Japan.

What Would Dumbya Do?

Or maybe Obama should’ve done what Dumbya’s father did, and thrown up all over his Japanese hosts.

Here’s a blog post about Obama’s “apologizing” and “groveling.” Check out the comments at the end of the post. There are some flatout scary stupid people out there.

In other Republican news: Remember Al Franken’s amendment to that defense bill, prohibiting the Pentagon from doing business with firms that force their employees to sign one of those “I promise not to squeal or make trouble if I get raped on the premises” clauses? And the thirty Republican senators who voted against the amendment (the amendment passed anyway)?

Those thirty Republicans are now horrified — Shocked! — at the backlash they’ve received. They sided with the gang-rapists — and the corporation that enabled them — over the rape victim, and all of a sudden them womenfolk are worrying their pretty little heads and going all hysterical and everything. Who knew?

But at least now those Republican senators have learned their lesson. Boy have they learned it. After some brutally honest soul-searching, the Republican Gang of Thirty have realized exactly what they did wrong. Their mistake: agreeing to a roll-call vote when they voted to stab rape victims in the back. What were they thinking?? Lesson learned!

The next time they vote to sell gang-rape victims down the river, they’ll do it with a simple voice vote instead of a roll-call vote. That way, the lowly public (i.e. their employers) won’t know who voted which way. They can still be a bunch of slippery backstabbing shitstains, but the public won’t know about it and won’t be able to hold them accountable.

Live and learn.