By Patricia Wilson
HOLLYWOOD, Fla. (Reuters)
“Without naming anybody, Kerry said he had received words of encouragement from leaders abroad who were eager to see him defeat Bush on Nov. 2.
“I’ve met foreign leaders who can’t go out and say this publicly, but boy they look at you and say, ‘You’ve got to win this, you’ve got to beat this guy, we need a new policy,’ things like that,” he said.”
According to the Financial Times, “North Korea [is warm] to a Kerry Presidency Bid”.
What about the other participant in the Axis of Evil… Iran?
According to Maahriv International, a significant Israeli news publication…
“Events in Washington over the past month changed that perception. [Iranian] conservatives seem to have decided that Bush could be vulnerable. As a result, they decided to renegotiate their agreement with Khatami, since they believe Iran can afford to get away with presenting a less enlightened image to the world. The result is the current crisis. Supreme leader Khamenei, the leader of the conservative faction, which is between the reactionaries and the reformists, but on the whole tends to side mostly with the former, will not take any decisive step until he has to, meaning until he and his advisors decide what Bush’s chances are. If they decide that his defeat is not a sure thing, the compromise he will arrange will favor the reformists, at least somewhat. If he decides that Iran can take the risk of assuming that Bush will not be reelected, the compromise will, in effect be an ultimatum to the reformists to surrender or else. . .
[A] covert understanding between Iran and the US was able to take place because of the balance of power in Iran, between the reformists led by President Khatami and Majlis (Parliament) speaker Mehdi Karroubi, the conservatives led by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and former president Rafsanjani, and the ultra-conservatives (some say reactionaries), led by the Ayatollahs Jannati, Meshkini and Shahrudi. The latter have decided to take out the reformists, having decided that Bush is unlikely to be reelected, and therefore willing to risk US ire, which, as far as they are concerned, will be limited to words if Bush is no longer president. If there is one thing these men do not fear, itï¿½s words. . . .
Teheranï¿½s aim is to see Bush defeated. The thinking in Teheran is that a Democratic president would not have the stomach to go to war in order to save Iraqï¿½s middle class. The result, snap elections won by the Shiites, the formation of a new anti-western Damascus-Baghdad-Teheran axis, armed with a large variety of lethal non conventional weapons.”
It’s no surprise he won’t name them.
Kerry then says, “It’s going to be hard fought, they’re going to do everything possible to tear down my character personally (and) Teresa. That’s the way they operate.” Obviously he understands his wife’s connections to George Soros, Peaceful Tomorrows and a host of other liberal activist organizations…. he’s got to try an innoculate against the obvious questions American will (and should) have about her participation and funding of things like “parade o’ outraged 9/11 widows to attack Bush ads”….
On a side note, the article continues:
“Kerry rejected what he has called the old style politics of divisiveness and said he would not let the finger-pointing distract from the issues of jobs, health care, the economy and national security.”
and wraps up with:
“Later, at a town hall meeting in Hollywood, Kerry vowed not to privatize the Social Security retirement system nor to cut benefits. He slammed the Medicare prescription drug bill as a “Bush boondoggle” for the pharmaceutical companies.”
Thank God he rejects finger-pointing and old style divisive politics….
“What we need now is not just regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,” Kerry said. source
I guess comparing a sitting President to a tyrannical, murdering dictator is considered a “new style” of politics. Please forgive me, but I think I’ll have to pass.