If, as Kerry claims, various “foreign leaders” are supporting him in his candidacy from behind the scenes, is that a good thing, or a bad thing?
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.
Perhaps the GOP can spread the rumor that the foreign leaders include Moammar Gaddafi, Fidel Castro, and Kim Jung Il.
It’s a bizarre claim to come out with, at any rate. Since they won’t go public with it (according to Kerry), and he won’t betray their confidence (he says), Kerry is reduced to simply saying, “I’ve got a secret — trust me, it would be really to everyone’s benefit if I won.” He could be making it up completely. He could be hinting at support from Zambia and Sri Lanka and Luxembourg.
Ultimately, it’s a meaningless assertion, only as good as your belief in Kerry. And even if he actually has France, Germany, Mexico, Russia, and whatever other country you want to name in his pocket … so what? Ought we be influenced in who we vote for based on who Jacques Chirac wants to see in the White House? Really?
Even if you grant that France and the US have some common interests, and even if you believe that the US policy has been at odds with France of late — is Jacques Chirac really hoping for a president that will serve the American people? Or one that will pursue policies that France sees as being to its benefit? Are those necessarily one and the same thing?
And why would Kerry think that’s a great claim to tout to potential voters?
And, as far as that goes, why the heck is Kerry hobnobbing with foreign leaders and accepting their well-wishes of victory? Is that really constructive toward future US foreign policy, regardless of who wins?
There’s a reason why contributions from foreign governments aren’t allowed in the presidential race. It strikes me that foreign endorsements — especially covert ones — aren’t much better, and that proclaiming them as a great reason to vote for oneself isn’t all that clever an idea.
(via RantingProfs)
Couldn’t get the Reuters article to work, so it may say the same as this, but it claims Kerry’s been contacted by Kim Jong Il
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040305/ts_nm/korea_north_kerry_dc_1
Certainly there are going to be some countries that wait out this year, hoping that Bush will be defeated. That isn’t necessarily evil (or good) of them, just a matter of mapping where their interests are.
The question, for American voters (who are supposed to be the parties actually doing the choosing) is whether foreign support is a good thing or a bad thing or an irrelevant thing — particularly when being put forward as an issue by one or more candidates.
That said, I don’t think support of North Korea will fly as “positive” for most Americans, should they consider it relevant.