So after Kerry's little "mis-speak", we get this analysis from Demosophist:
"Yes he misspoke, almost certainly, but does that make a difference?
There are, after all, only two ways one can interpret what was said.
1. Smart, intelligent, hard-working people opposed the war from its inception; while stupid, uneducated, slothful people supported it. We'll ignore for the moment that he initially supported it. By his own admission this statement closely paraphrases what he intended to say.
2. Those who serve in Iraq are stupid, uneducated, slothful people. He claims that he didn't intend to convey that message.
The problem is that most of the men serving in Iraq supported the war from its inception, and still do. So even if he didn't intend to say 2. that message still follows from 1. as long as one is smart enough to make an elementary inference. Even worse, the second statement is a fair characterization of what the Democrats have been saying about the military for a number of years, claiming that the modern service is mainly composed of people too dumb and too vulnerable to avoid the song and dance of the military recruiter."
But of course it gets worse. If Kerry was just talking about Bush being stupid (more shocking Victicratic behavior -- not) then that's the reason why Dems are always calling Elephants stupid while simultaneously denying any validity to grades or intelligence tests.
Because of course Bush got better grades at Yale than Kerry did ...
Posts
