That is how Agence France-Presse describes him, in a fawning profile. How fitting that Kerry should be beloved by the French! It is no secret that the Europeans, in general, sympathize with the Democratic Party and are bewildered, at best, by Republicans. Still, it is interesting to see what Europeans will be reading about our current Secretary of State.
By plane, motorcade and occasional helicopter, top US diplomat John Kerry is diving into his new role, burning midnight oil as he seeks an elusive Mideast peace deal.
After six high-profile trips to the region in as many months, the US secretary of state announced Friday he has something to show for his efforts: an upcoming meeting in Washington where Israeli and Palestinian negotiators will discuss a possible resumption of peace talks.
Am I the only one who thinks it is hilarious that our Secretary of State is devoting substantially all of his efforts to bringing peace to the only place in the Middle East that is already peaceful? Wouldn’t it be a better idea to try to bring peace to, say, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Libya, Turkey or Iraq?
[Kerry] landed his dream job this year, taking up the helm at the State Department on February 1 to help shape America’s foreign policy.
Kerry, 69, brings impeccable credentials to the position.
Really? He is a man of modest intelligence at best, who was a do-nothing senator for several decades. He became Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by virtue of seniority, and achieved nothing in that position.
Kerry, perhaps best known abroad for his failed 2004 presidential bid, took over from Hillary Clinton, who won accolades during her four years on the job.
Seriously? Accolades from whom? What foreign policy accomplishments can be attributed to Hillary’s four years at Foggy Bottom? I am aware of none. Here in the U.S., she is best remembered for Benghazi. But in the European press, all Democrats get a pass. Well, actually, that is pretty much true here, too.
At his January confirmation hearing, Kerry set out some clear foreign policy priorities. He warned the US would do “what we must” to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and told China he would work to strengthen ties.
The world believed in Kerry’s determination to stop Iran’s nuclear program to exactly the same degree that it believed in Barack Obama’s.
He also vowed to be “a passionate advocate” to tackle climate change.
Kerry has even less chance of changing the climate than of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Kerry was born in Denver, Colorado on December 11, 1943 to a privileged family. His mother Rosemary was part of the Forbes shipping clan and spent much of her early life on an estate in France. …
Kerry’s childhood, spent in private schools in Switzerland and New England, fashioned the character of the so-called “Boston Brahmin” who would eventually face blistering Republican attacks for his internationalist views.
That, plus his incompetence and his anti-American history.
After graduating with a law degree from Yale University in 1966, Kerry joined the Navy and volunteered to fight in Vietnam.
Kerry’s undergraduate degree, not his law degree, was from Yale. He graduated from Boston College law school because he couldn’t get into Harvard or Yale.
During his second 48-day tour, as a lieutenant in charge of dangerous “Swift” gunboat missions in the Mekong Delta, Kerry was awarded three Purple Hearts for wounds suffered and a Bronze Star and a Silver Star for valor.
But he returned from Vietnam disenchanted with the war, and, in testimony before Congress in April 1971, he famously asked: “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”
His remarks made him a hero of the anti-war left in the 1970s and underpinned his 2004 election-year opposition to the Iraq war.
Kerry is best remembered for falsely accusing his fellow American servicemen of being mass murderers.
To make matters worse, a group of Vietnam veterans known as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth released a series of blistering attack ads accusing Kerry of lying about his service.
Kerry eventually pushed back, saying the ads were completely false. Republican Senator John McCain, a fellow veteran, also condemned them, but Kerry nevertheless lost the 2004 election.
That’s how the AFP piece ends: Kerry’s defeat was one of those inexplicable American election outcomes. This is rapidly becoming ancient history, but the Swift Boat Vets put out a number of ads, only one of which, as I recall, questioned Kerry’s medals or contained any factual statements that were disputed by anyone. The Vets’ chief service was to alert millions of Americans who didn’t remember John Kerry to the disgraceful role he played in relation to the Vietnam War. One of the Vets’ ads showed archival footage of Kerry slandering his fellow servicemen in front of a Senate committee. “Completely false”? I don’t think so. Another showed that every single officer in Kerry’s Navy chain of command believed that he is unfit to be president. Democrats conveniently forget the facts when they talk about the Swift Boat Vets.
Why does AFP like Democrats like John Kerry so much? Simple. They want America to be weak, and they recognize in Kerry, and others like him, kindred spirits. Why American reporters and editors share the same prejudices is a more complicated question.