Worse yet for Democrats, Kerry's statement will invite voters to compare the parties' respective positions on the war, including Iraq. Enough voters surely know that if we lose in Iraq, which we will if Democrats have their way, terrorists will be emboldened and we'll sustain a dramatic setback in the war on terror. Kerry's remarks have also energized Republican voters and further increased their intensity.
Hillary Clinton says no one wants to see a replay of the 2004 elections. "It's in the past," she says. No, Sen. Clinton, you couldn't be more incorrect, and thanks to your colleague, John Kerry, voters are waking up to your error. Democrats have been running, but they can no longer hide. The pivotal issue in 2004 was national security. It remains so today and will remain so into the indefinite future.
Will voters restore congressional control to the party that has consistently obstructed our prosecution of the war on terror and who will ensure, like they did in Vietnam three decades ago, that a bloodbath will follow our premature withdrawal? Will the voters during time of war embrace a party that reflexively distrusts the military?
I am cautiously optimistic they won't. But in the meantime, we should take the opportunity presented by Kerry's intemperate and elitist remarks to reflect on the valor, dedication, patriotism, sacrifice and quality of our fighting forces.
The best single volume I've found paying tribute to the American military is "Don't Tread on Me," a sweeping, fast-paced 400-year history of America at war by my friend Harry Crocker.
When you read this book you will be reminded of how much we owe our military and how vigorously we must support them -- now more than ever, and especially when we go to vote. Our fighting men deserve better than a Congress led by John Kerry's party; they deserve a Congress that believes, as Harry does, in a foreign policy of Don't Tread On Me . Let's elect a Congress committed to victory, not defeat.