I can't believe that the Bush campaign caved to John Kerry on the Swift Boat ads issue.

The Swift Boat Veterans for Justice's John O'Neill deserves every bit as much freedom of speech as Kerry's Paul O'Neill, but John Forbes Kerry believes in freedom of speech only for those who agree with him - and according to recent polls, most Americans are or will soon be on John Kerry's s-list (I am, of course, alluding to the Sullan Proscriptions, for those who were preparing to be offended).

What a splendid Presidential candidate the Democrats have found - John Forbes Kerry doesn't even respect the Bill of Rights!

Kerry's disregard for the Constitutional rights of others is not surprising. Consider who Kerry worked for after leaving the Navy - Kerry was unstinting in his labor for the Viet Cong and North Vietnam, and I think sometimes Kerry yearns for Ho Chi Minh's and Pol Pot's ability to silence people who said bad things about them.

By contrast, the President did not demand the silence of the former Treasury Secretary and confirmed thief of classified documents Paul O'Neill who, along with Richard Clarke and Joe Wilson - Kerry's other Political Hacks for Injustice - was a huckster for the Democratic Party on CBS's 60 Minutes - an alleged "television news magazine" which has been more of a political windshield flyer for the Democrats this last few years.

No whack-o conspiracy theories about Kerry, no "he knows all about it, they're doing his dirty work for him" whining from George W. Bush regarding the "60 Minutes Book Plug of the Week Club" Liars for Kerry.

No, it takes a cynical, lying mountebank like John Kerry to talk about a shadowy conspiracy on the President's part when Kerry himself has all that soft money from his boss John Edwards, and Edwards' bosses the personal-injury lawsuit industry, more soft money from the weird Bush-hating cult Moveon.org and even more soft money from the Bush-hating Hungarian multi-millionaire George Soros.

Soros, between destabilizing the British economy by currency manipulation and propping up dictators in former Soviet republics, has sworn to defeat George Bush. Soros runs a close second to Kim Jong-Il as the real-life inspiration for "Dr. Evil" in the Austin Powers movies.

And through the magic of unrestricted soft funds, John Forbes Kerry, the supposed great patriot, is now George Soros' bought-and-paid-for "Mr. Biggles," just as Kerry was the Viet Cong's, Pathet Lao's, Khmer Rouge's and North Vietnam's hand-puppet throughout the early 1970s.

John Kerry has worked harder for shadowy foreigners who kill their political dissidents than he has for other Americans all his life - even while taking a salary as a United States Senator, he was a reliable anchorman for Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega and the Sandinista leftist terror regime of the 1980s.

Why haven't the usually super-inquisitive investigative journalists of the big television networks and major-market, high-circulation daily newspapers (the New York Times and Los Angeles Times) looked into John Forbes Kerry's career as an apologist and lobbyist for Stalinists whose idea of political discourse is small-arms fire directed into the backs of their opponents' heads?

Is it even remotely possible that if it had been Bush and not Kerry in that situation that this story would have gone unreported?

Given
- Senator Kerry's lifelong affection for murdering totalitarian scum, and
- Kerry having been talent-scouted by George Soros as one more dirtbag Soros can manipulate,
I ask again - why does any American want John Kerry, lifelong admirer of and apologist for murdering dictators, as President?

I don't see the value in caving in to John Kerry on anything, especially something as potentially damaging to Kerry as his Swift Boat record - and which Kerry could neutralize simply by unsealing his Navy records - something he has repeatedly declined to do. If the Swifties are wrong about Kerry, wouldn't the records resolve that issue.

If people want to circulate snapshots of John Kerry on his Swift Boat in flagrante delicto with a Border Collie, the Bush campaign should fold their arms and chuckle the way Kerry and his people giggle when Michael Moore emits one of his episodes of cinematic flatus about the President.

We who oppose the election of John Kerry as President should try to give new depth and meaning to the term schadenfreude when someone else tees off on John Kerry. When the would-be Whiner of the Free World asks us to intervene with people who want to tar and feather him on the Evening News, our response should be "We got your nuance right here, Hanoi John."

George Bush, who doesn't ask the (as Al Franken calls them) Lying Liars who Lie about him on Kerry's behalf to shut up, has NO business providing damage control - even half-half hearted damning with faint, almost undetectable praise for Kerry's rapidly disintegrating reputation for bravery in Vietnam, after the Swift Boat Veterans for Justice put a hole under Kerry's water line.

Kerry and the Democrats probably can't actually prove Paul O'Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans for Justice wrong. If they could, wouldn't we be seeing any such proof (such as Kerry's Naval records) for three solid months on the CBS Evening News and Bill Moyers' NOW? So far, all we're seeing is Dan Rather ripping his eyebrow tendons while emoting on John Kerry's behalf about those horrible men who served with John Kerry in Vietnam.

No, more likely, Kerry's war record doesn't line up with the way it really happened, so Kerry accuses the President of exactly the sort of "dirty work" Democrats and their allies in the media have been pulling on Bush since before 2000! This, of course, is hypocrisy on the part of the national leftist press - and thus, I suppose, not news.