Zell's Speech
By krempasky Posted in Special Events — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Apparently, John Kerry voted for a bowl of mush and not much else. Oh, and Zell is PISSED. Read on for the full text of his speech.
Remarks by Senator Zell Miller (D-GA)
Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller Family has been born: Four great grandchildren.
Along with all the other members of our close-knit family -- they are my and Shirley’s most
precious possessions.And I know that’s how you feel about your family also.
Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face.
Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.
And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the
backbone to best protect my family?The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight. For my family is
more important than my party.There is but one man to whom I am willing to entrust their future and that man’s name is
George Bush.In the summer of 1940, I was an eight-year-old boy living in a remote little Appalachian valley.
Our country was not yet at war but even we children knew that there were some crazy men
across the ocean who would kill us if they could.
President Roosevelt, in his speech that summer, told America “all private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger.”In 1940 Wendell Wilkie was the Republican nominee.
And there is no better example of someone repealing their “private plans” than this good man.
He gave Roosevelt the critical support he needed for a peacetime draft, an unpopular idea at the
time.And he made it clear that he would rather lose the election than make national security a partisan campaign issue.
Shortly before Wilkie died he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to
choose between "here lies a president" or "here lies one who contributed to saving freedom", he
would prefer the latter.Where are such statesmen today?
Where is the bi-partisanship in this country when we need it most?
Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan,
our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat’s manic obsession to
bring down our Commander-in-Chief.What has happened to the party I’ve spent my life working in?
I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom
over tyranny.It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to
the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet
blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked
together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today.Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today’s Democratic leaders see
America as an occupier, not a liberator.
And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather
than liberators.Tell that to the one-half of Europe that was freed because Franklin Roosevelt led an army of
liberators, not occupiers.Tell that to the lower half of the Korean Peninsula that is free because Dwight Eisenhower
commanded an army of liberators, not occupiers.
Tell that to the half a billion men, women and children who are free today from the Baltics to the Crimea, from Poland to Siberia, because Ronald Reagan rebuilt a military of liberators, not occupiers.Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier. And, our soldiers don’t just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.
For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the
agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.
No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he
doesn’t believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.But don’t waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of
thinking America is the problem, not the solution.They don’t believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon
itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.It is not their patriotism - it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter’s pacifism would lead to peace.
They were wrong.
They claimed Reagan’s defense buildup would lead to war.
They were wrong.
And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from
Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.
Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and
that is now winning the War on Terror.
Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an
auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40% of the bombs in the first six months
of Operation Enduring Freedom.The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in
Afghanistan and Hussein’s command post in Iraq.
The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi’s Libyan MIGs over the
Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes
against Tora Bora.The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in
Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our
Nation’s Capital and this very city after 9/11.
I could go on and on and on: Against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein’s scud
missiles over Israel, Against the Aegis air-defense cruiser, Against the Strategic Defense
Initiative, Against the Trident missile, against, against, against.This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?
U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?
Twenty years of votes can tell you much more about a man than twenty weeks of campaign
rhetoric.Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who
you really are deep inside.Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United
Nations.Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. I want Bush to decide.
John Kerry, who says he doesn’t like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.
That’s the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world.
Free for how long?
For more than twenty years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry
has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure. As a war
protestor, Kerry blamed our military.As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more
clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far-away.George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.
John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday’s war. George Bush believes we have to fight today’s war
and be ready for tomorrow’s challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of
forces it takes to root out terrorists.No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.
George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.
From John Kerry, they get a “yes-no-maybe” bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies
and confuse our friends.I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man.
I am moved by the respect he shows the First Lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his
daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.I can identify with someone who has lived that line in “Amazing Grace,” “Was blind, but now I
see,” and I like the fact that he’s the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.
He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot
more than words.I have knocked on the door of this man’s soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with
a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.
The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.This election will change forever the course of history, and that’s not any history. It’s our
family’s history.The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before
us, we’ve got some hard choosing to do.Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted, self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.
In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud
to stand up with him.Thank you.
God Bless this great country and God Bless George W. Bush.
« Liveblogging the Vice President at CPAC — Comments (0) | Trouble on the third night? — Comments (10) »
Zell's Speech 20 Comments (0 topical, 20 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I'm not usually taken in by political speeches -- I listen to what is said rationally, and I don't get caught up emotionally. If anything, I'm very critical of the speeches (as in constructive criticism, not cynicism), from both sides of the aisle. But Zell had me standing up, grinning, pumping my fist in the air, by myself in my apartment. This may be tempered by the fact I'm just twenty-two, but that is the best speech I have ever seen.
And I think that it's the best political speech I've seen at a convention. Zell was trippin it old school, dude.
I fully expected him to end it with "Kerry delenda est!"
Reagan was better. But that's as far as it goes.
Zell's speech was a devastating, plain-spoken attack on the liberal philosophy in the War on Terror. I believe it will resonate strongly with the American people, esp. coming from a Democrat.
Jonathan Edwards that is.
I mean that should be published and learned by Freshman in every High School.
Oh, and did anyone see him on Hardball?
Good Lord. Zell took Matthews to the Woodshed and I mean he destroyed Matthews.
So, the score is Zell has a body count of 2 and the night is still young.
I've watched all the speeches all 3 nights. This was by far the best speech of the convention so far. I imagine Bush has a powerful speech in line for tomorrow night, but this was was great. I had Tivo running, and watched it over again. Twice.
I'm 38 and live in Texas. Worked (volunteer) for Bush's first campaign for Govenor. I've heard lots of speeches, and this one had me cheering.
Zell definitely gave a speech befitting of the term "barnburner." I, too, noticed how the media tried to dismiss the speech as "too angry." Yet, as the Luntz focus group demonstrated, many of the folks at home were not frightened by it at all. In fact, a majority of the group enjoyed it.
What amazes me is how the media intelligentsia and the Democrats still continue to not grasp the greater meaning of his speech. There is a reason why the pre-1968 convention Democrats no longer support the Democratic Party, and Zell expressed those reasons very well last night. Rather than dismiss the speech as the actions of an angry, senile, bitter old man, perhaps it might serve them well to be more circumspect and reflect upon why the Democratic Party no longer is the majority party in this country.
I think this might the equivalent of Buchannan's culture war speech--a turnoff for the uncommitted or the weakly committed.
Also, here's a speech Zell gave praising Kerry! So go figure:
Who's in for $1, under the RedState troll punishment program?
I didn't think the rhetoric was really all that incendiary, i.e. Buchanan's "Lock and Load!" That, and I think Buchanan's speech looked and sounded a lot worse after the "white supremacist" allegations that dogged his 92 primary run.
But someone who does it with canned talking points is either a gibbering idiot or a troll.
Nevertheless Miller HAS changed his positon from a few years ago and many people thought his speech was angry or over the top. I don't need to compare him to Buchanan, but doing so is shorthand for saying Miller might have caused more harm than good.
Almost as much as content. Disagree with me? You wouldn't be the first. Rehash -- sometimes word for word -- trite talking points, and you're either dense or a troll.
And, just in case I'm not clear, I'm not accusing you of being either.
I loved the speech, it spoke to the heart of the GOP argument against Kerry. BUT, it should of came from someone with less of a credibility gap. Zell is on record as having the same voting record as Kerry on defense. They are ripping him apart on the news show, using his record and words against him. They needed a true Republican, not a fake Democrat, to make the case.
As a general indictment on our present culture, I like how the standard is so high that only Jesus could "credibly" make a statement about someone else. If you can't attack the comments, attack the person. If the person is hypocritical in saying such, the comments cannot possibly be truthful. So on and so on. No wonder politics gets down in the mud--the media takes it there any time someone opens their mouth.
If Zell voted exactly the same as Kerry on everything, Zell isn't running for president. Kerry is. The truth remains that the Kerry camp hasn't produced one defense system program that Kerry voted for. Cheney (who also isn't running for president) didn't vote to approve or cut systems. Cheney was given a budget by Congress and he had to choose what to spend it on--of course he is going to have to make hard choices with a shrinking budget. As he himself said:
I forced the Army to make choices. I said, "You can't have all three. We don't have the money for all three."
As for Zell being a fake democrat, he is only fake by way of the fact that the current democratic party has passed him by. He addressed that. The party used to be the party of Harry Truman; it is now the party of Ted Kennedy. Of course he is fake by today's standards. I also believe that only a democrat (whether he be called fake or faithful) could have made that speech. In the personal disparagement that inevitably follows such a speech, the result is the further cannibalization of democratic support. If a republican made the speech, then republicans are "hate mongers." If a democrat made the speech, you can't discount it so easily. If the democrats denounce him with personal smears, like saying he is a racist, then the inevitable question becomes why their party put up with Zell "the racist" for so long. Even if the democrats accuse him of being weak on defense himself, then they admit that Kerry is also weak.
If this speech is a toned-version of a more conservative speech, I hope he releases the original text.
This may be the best polticial speech I have ever seen, barring some of Reagan's. I have no doubt it will go down in history as one of the best convention speeches in the modern political era. This will be one you tell your grandchildren you saw. Thank goodness it's in prime time.
Part of hte genius is that this man is a Democrat speaking to the Republican convention and attacking the nominees of his own party like no Republican ever could.
I kinda feel sorry for Dick Cheney to have to follow this act. I'm sure he'll do fine, but I doubt even W will match this one.