Let's see if I can't fisk some of John Kerry's speech today. This is not to say that I disagree with everything. I am all for lowering our dependence on imported oil and strengthening alliances. I wonder if this speech signals a "leaving behind" of the economy as the driving issue.
---------------------------------------------
There was a time, not so long ago, when the might of our alliances was a driving force in the survival and success of freedom – in two World Wars, in the long years of the Cold War – then from the Gulf War to Bosnia and Kosovo. America led instead of going it alone. We extended a hand, not a fist.

I guess we'll leave out the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Ronald Reagan's arms buildup, our support for Latin American dictatorships, etc. We were perfect world citizens and always everyone's friend until Bush came along.

More than a century ago, Teddy Roosevelt defined American leadership in foreign policy. He said America should walk softly and carry a big stick. Time and again, this Administration has violated the fundamental tenet of Roosevelt’s approach, as he described it: “If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble.”

Seems like Mr. Kerry left out the last part of that quote:

His "speak softly, carry a big stick" metaphor has been oft repeated, but what Roosevelt said was more complex: "If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble but neither will speaking softly avail, if back of the softness there does not lie strength, power."

They have gone it alone when they should have assembled a team.

Um, can you say the word "coalition". Isn't any number greater than one "not alone"?

They have hoped for the best when they should have prepared for the worst.

Can you not do both? See my post below about "Chicken Little" becoming the new Democrat symbol. Doom and gloom. Doom and gloom. Doom and gloom.

Today, there is still a powerful yearning around the world for an America that listens and leads again.

Really...the great hope of the world is to follow behind America?

I’m running for president because, abroad as well as at home, it’s time to let America be America again.

This is Kerry's comfort food slogan. Would we be wanting to be the slaveholding America, the Jim Crow America, the atomic-bomb-using America or the Vietnam America? Maybe he means Jimmy Carter's America? What the f*** does let America be America again mean? "Morning in America" I understand. I know he can do better.

Third, in addition to our military might, we must deploy all that is in America’s arsenal -- our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas.

Arsenal? What happened to "Walk softly...bluster...etc."

Osama bin Laden is still at large, because the Bush Administration didn’t finish him off at the battle of Tora Bora.

Walk soflty....walk softly...walk softly....

The first new imperative represents a return to the principle that guided us in peril and victory through the past century – alliances matter, and the United States must lead them.

And everyone will just fall in line behind us why?

Because al Qaeda is a network with many branches, we must take the fight to the enemy on every continent – and enlist other countries in that cause.

So we should expand the war on terror even though we don't already don't have enough troops? I think he meant additional countries.

America must always be the world’s paramount military power. But we can magnify our power through alliances.

All the more reason for allies to want to line up behind us - so that we can become even more powerful. You spilled the beans, John!

This commander-in-chief will ensure that you are the best-led, best-equipped and most respected fighting force in the world.

Despite his past record of voting against various increases in military budgets and receiving a Purple Heart for a splinter and committing atrocities in Vietnam.

Any potential adversary should know that we will defend ourselves against the possibility of attack by unconventional arms. If such a strike does occur, as commander-in-chief, I will respond with overwhelming and devastating force. If such an attack appears imminent, as commander-in-chief, I will do whatever is necessary to stop it. And, as commander-in-chief, I will never cede our security to anyone.

What incredible bullshit! Whatever is necessary! Bullshit! That's Malcom X talking, not Teddy Roosevelt. Respond to what with overwhelming force? The dead attackers? The terrorists hiding in schools, mosques and hospitals? Blow 'em up - woohoo! Sure sounds like "Shock and Awe" to me. Could the Bush administration have killed or captured more Al-Qaeda operatives and Sadaam loyalists without killing many more innocent civilians? How would he know when an unconventional strike is "imminent"? I prefer not to wait and to go on "grave and gathering" thank you. You will never cede our security to anyone unless someone says they don't want to help us in which case we're screwed because our alliance isn't big enough.

This initiative will include changes in international treaties, sharing of intelligence, and setting conditions for economic sanctions and the interdiction of illegal shipments. The key is for America to lead: to build an international consensus for early preventive action, so that states don’t even think of taking the nuclear road, and potential traffickers in nuclear and biological technology fear the consequences of getting caught.

Umm...isn't "early preventive" another way of saying "pre-emptive"? What do we do, show Iran a treaty signed by France and THEN bomb their nuclear reactor?