The Sixth Reason I Oppose Kerry

            The sixth reason I oppose Kerry is because he is a boor. I did not say that he was boring, as in somebody who can put you to sleep by his presence or talk. He bears careful watching all the time as anyone who can and is willing to do great harm to the country. I am saying I oppose him because he is boorish, which is to say a rude person. Mr. Kerry has a history of displaying boorishness that is not an indicator of any future confidence that I can have in his conduct.

            An example of his consummate boorishness took place on the last night of the Republican Convention. He tried to upstage the President by having a midnight rally, EST, after Bush had made his acceptance speech. One of the things talked about during the coverage was the practice of one party not politicking during other party’s conventions. We might suppose Kerry, ignoring the opportunities his campaign had used to interject themselves during the Republican Convention, might argue his rally occurred after the GOP had closed in New York. But majoring on technicalities are often the characteristic of boorishness.

            Other examples of Kerry’s boorishness were seen in the truth police that was sent to the GOP get together. The head of this group was none other than Hillary Clinton. Her claims to honesty include such things as her relationship with Vince Foster and documents that were edited before being turned over at the time of his death. Oh yes, and then there were the Whitewater documents that were supposedly found in a closet after some considerable delay. Did I mention the Whitehouse china and furniture she tried to take with her to New York? Another one of his compatriots and allies is Michael Moore who confuses documentaries with science fiction, and that is one of his better traits. You are known by the company you keep and what you send your allies to do on your behalf. Rude people’s ideas of facts are often how they can distort the truth to see their own ends met.

            Boorishness can be seen in how rude people conduct themselves in public. Senator Kerry’s rude gesture at the Vietnam Memorial could be viewed as a single incident were it not known that this was but one of a number of times he has misbehaved. When a person is truly a gentleman their conduct is not determined by the conduct of others. They behave correctly because proper behavior is part of who they are. Rude or boorish behavior, even in provocation, can be elicited only under extreme duress. Examples of Kerry boorishness extend even to things that have happened when he was supposedly vacationing and should have even been more relaxed. Teresa Heinz Kerry’s own rude suggestion, that was commented upon in the media, is a reflection of her husband and a demonstration that rude conduct is a characteristic of how their family operates.

The fact Kerry reacted angrily when news that he had consulted with Bill Clinton leaked out also helps to demonstrate more of his true boorishness. I would call it the egotism of boorishness. His ego requires that his campaign and projects must all be his own idea. He cannot consult with others who have walked the same path, and have it known as people who have ran for high office have done before him. Why is this? It interferes with the view of perfection he thinks he is projecting. His anger demonstrates not that he is human but he has the immaturity of those who are rude or boorish.

Boorish people are often tremendously self-centered. It is this concentration on self that contributes to their boorishness. For instance many people had cameras in Vietnam. Few had motion picture cameras outside of military photographers and press. People in Vietnam took pictures of their friends and surroundings. If you visit many of the sites maintained by veterans on the Internet, you find most have a lot more pictures of friends than they do of themselves. Naval Lt. Kerry is the only person I have ever heard of that actually had subordinates reenacting things for filming to make himself a hero. I do not know, but I doubt he did this with the approval of the Navy, and I doubt he reimbursed the Armed Forces for fuel and other materials used making his films. Taking his men back into places that might pose a danger to them for the sake of filming shows an unconcern for their well being. But then I did say self-centeredness is a quality common among the boorish. Kerry’s preoccupation with his glory continues to this day. I need but to recount the incident where the motorcycle policeman in his escort wrecked to illustrate my point. He did not go back to check on the officer until he was sure there were media people to observe his humanitarian concern.

Boorish people have difficulty taking responsibility for their own actions when they do not go well. I believe this is why the man shows such a wishy-washy explanation for his voting record in certain areas saying he voted for it before he voted against it. The aversion to taking responsibility is founded in people when they are very young, and could be traced to his childhood upbringing or lack thereof. But we can see his conduct here has a consistent record going back to the time he was testifying before Congress. While testifying about the supposed war crimes of others he followed the “Nuremberg Nazi Defense” concerning himself, “I was following orders.” We have never seen Kerry take responsibility for the blood bath that followed the U.S. abandonment of Vietnam, an event he played a significant role in helping to bring about. In the same vein, we will never see him take responsibility for the terrorism he is encouraging by what he says as he campaigns for President. His vow to conduct a more sensitive war on terrorism must surely give great hope to America’s enemies.

            Kerry’s boorishness in speech is not confined to simply saying things that are not true, or twisting the facts, which are merely the ploy of any politician on the wrong side of an issue. No, his boorishness relates to a whole history of saying the wrong things to the wrong people. Most recently he did this before a meeting of the American Veterans. He said:

“You are the citizen soldiers who know that our service does not end on the battlefield - it begins there. You know that the pledge we took to defend America is also a pledge to protect the promise America offers. And let there be no doubt - when I am president, you will have a fellow veteran in the White House who understands that those who fought for our country abroad should never have to fight for what they were promised at home.”

Kerry was speaking to an organization of people who do not have to ever have been in combat, or even to have been overseas to be among the membership. He was insensitive that he was talking to people who could feel demeaned in their service by how he framed his words. But it cannot compare to what he said in his book “The New Soldier:”

“We will not quickly join those who march on Veteran’s Day, waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the greater glory of the United States. We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veteran’s of Foreign Wars.”

In that in print statement he managed to not only insult my father, and his four brothers, one of which was at Pearl Harbor and another who died in combat in Germany, he also managed to insult my brother and myself, not to mention the generations of my ancestors who were in this land long before the actual founding of the nation. Do you wonder I think he is a boor? Do you wonder I do not want him to join with me in planting small flags at gravesites on Veteran’s Day and Memorial Day?

            Actually I have not exhausted the subject of my opposition to Kerry based on his boorishness. But now I will stop. I find the idea that an American political party would support such a man for President or that he might actually become President extremely depressing.