Truespeak

HATEFEST, 2004 - What a scene it was. Zell Miller, in front of a live television audience and an arena full of people, blew a gasket. Tendons straining, veins bulging, and eyes wide; Miller let loose with a tirade the likes of which we haven't heard in years. I watched the event on MSNBC and I had to keep checking to make sure I was on the right channel. For a while, I thought I had mistakenly turned to the Discovery Channel and caught the middle of a special on convulsions. All day long I've seen the clips of Miller claiming Kerry was going to fight the enemy with spitballs. And what does the media say? It was a "fiery" speech. They talk to the Republicans and many are saying it was a great speech, typical Zell Miller. Obviously nobody in the press is willing to actually analyze what he said. They're content to let the Republicans define it. So here tonight, I am going to attempt to sift through the hate and bile and actually examine the claims made. Here we go.

He began by saying:

Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller family has been born: four great-grandchildren. Along with all the other members of our close-knit family, they are my and Shirley's most precious possessions. And I know that's how you feel about your family, also.

Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face. Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.

Well, Zell, I think it's good that you're concerned about the future and your great-grandchildren. I would be very concerned if I were you. If George W. Bush is re-elected, there is a good chance that your great-grandchildren will have to serve in the armed forces. If Bush is re-elected, there is a good chance that the world's environment will be so damaged by the time your great-grandchildren are grown that it could be detrimental to their health. If George Bush id re-elected, there is a good chance that the country will be in such financial ruin that the programs that have helped so many for so long will be bankrupt. If George Bush is re-elected, there is a good chance that they will be unable to afford health insurance for themselves or their own children. If George Bush is re-elected, there is a good chance that his tax cuts will have forced millions more into poverty and millions will be without jobs. So I understand your concern Zell. Maybe your speech wasn't as hateful as the critics have said.

Let's move on:

Where is the bipartisanship in this country when we need it most?

That's a good question Zell. Let's see how you answered it.

Today, at the same time young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats' manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief.

What has happened to the party I've spent my life working in? I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom over tyranny. It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.

Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter.

But not today.

Well at least he didn't answer with a partisan response. Next.

Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.

And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.

Surely he doesn't mean like when George Bush made this statement:

"...look, I understand they [Iraq] don't like being occupied. Heck, I wouldn't like being occupied."

Because if he did, he must be pretty pissed at our President right now.

Moving right along:

Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier.

And, our soldiers don't just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.

For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.

It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom he abuses to burn that flag.

Actually Zell, it's the Constitution that gives us those rights. The soldiers that protect them. Protecting our rights is something our current President could learn a lot about. Instead of ammending the Constitution to include discrimination, he needs to examine it and see that it's not about denying rights, but granting them. Little slip up there Zell, but let's keep going.

Together, Kennedy and Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that are now winning the war on terror.

Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security.

But Americans need to know the facts.

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Enduring Freedom.

The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down

Gadhafi's Libyan MiGs over the Gulf of Sidra.

The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War.

The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's capital and this very city after 9/11.

I could go on and on and on -- against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile, against, against, against.

This is the man who wants to be the commander in chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?

U.S. forces armed with what? Spit balls?

Now Zell, you don't really mean to say that voting against those weapons was bad do you? Apparently you aren't aware of the fact that when Kerry voted against those weapons, the Senate was being urged by then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney to do so. And Mr. Cheney was urging them to vote against those weapons at the behest of our then President George H. W. Bush. You might want to go back and check your notes on that one.

For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure.

As a war protester, Kerry blamed our military.

Wrong, he blamed the government for putting the military in a situation for which they were unprepared.

As a senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harm's way, far away.

Actually Zell, Kerry has voted for Defense Appropriations bills thirteen out of nineteen years. And as he has said repeatedly, he did vote for the $87 billion, just not the version that had us borrowing money to pay for equipment the troops should have been supplied with to begin with.

Overall, this was the most hateful, bile spewing, innacurate speech I think I have ever heard. What fascinates me most is that the majority of the speech focused on John Kerry. In fact, the majority of this Convention has focused on John Kerry. Maybe it's because Zell and the rest of the Conservatives have realized that you can only get just so much mileage out of fifteen minutes atop a pile of rocks three days after a disaster.

It's sad really. Too bad I can't feel any sympathy for him.