Yesterday, I posted what follows at my blog, and today that I see that the key news report I cited has vanished! While the story may reappear, I decided to offer this post as a lesson in the importance of obtaining a Google cache.
Which foreign leaders are endorsing Kerry?
Well, shortly before his election last week, Spain’s new president-elect Jose Rodriguez Zapatero said he wanted Kerry to win:
But opinion in Spain, as in Britain, is divided. The Spanish opposition leader in the general election this Sunday, the socialist José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, said yesterday: “I think Kerry will win. I want Kerry to win.”
I think when you say you want someone to win, that’s an endorsement.
I hope no one is denying this….
(I first heard about this on the G. Gordon Liddy Show, which led me to find the Guardian article.)
UPDATE: More details here (from the Majorca Daily Bulletin) on what Zapatero actually plans to do for Senator Kerry:
Zapatero fights losing battle
“THE latest opinion polls are like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. A complete fabrication.” This was socialist candidate for Prime Minister Jose Luiz Zapatero in buoyant form in Palma on Thursday night. Zapatero is well behind in the opinion polls and looks set to be defeated by the conservative Partido Popular leader Mariano Rajoy in the general elections on March 14 but he certainly got his message across. The words too little too late come to mind because what he said in Palma should touch a chord with many voters. “The first thing I will do when I am elected is to go to the United States and support John Kerry, my allies will be the students and families who can’t afford their own home,” and on the question of the Balearics “the PP’s model for these islands is build without limit”. The party faithful just loved it and he will certainly have raised morale. But barring any last minute change Zapatero will not be going to the United States, well not as Prime Minister anyhow. His comments on Kerry come as no surprise; he is a socialist and naturally a Democrat in the White House would suit him quite nicely. Zapatero is fighting a losing battle against a Partido Popular machine which is modern, forward thinking, and very much Madrid based and big on the international stage. The socialist leader could do with a helping hand. Who better to help Zapatero than another socialist candidate who was even more impressive than the young Spaniard. Of course I am referring to Mr. Anthony Blair who has not uttered a single word of encouragement for his Spanish counterpart, in fact he wined and dined Rajoy at Number 10, just recently. You can understand why there is no love lost between the Zapatero camp and Blair. Surely a socialist government in Spain would be better for Blair?
So, this isn’t just a passing remark; coming to the United States and working for Kerry is the “first thing” Zapatero will do!
At least, that was his campaign promise….
Once again, I have not read my local newspapers in detail, and it is possible that all of this is being reported. (I have not see it anywhere in the American press, though.) When I find out that it has been, I promise to update this post.
Till then, should I hold my breath?
MORE ON THE GUARDIAN: I’m glad I posted the cache of the Guardian article because, as Andrew Sullivan points out, the Guardian’s policy is one of “complete moral nihilism in the face of unspeakable violence”:
In Europe, there are no bad guys, even those who deliberately murdered almost 200 innocents and threaten to murder countless more. Ask yourself: If the Guardian cannot call these people “bad guys,” then who qualifies? And if the leaders of democratic societies cannot qualify in this context as “good guys,” then who qualifies? What we have here is complete moral nihilism in the face of unspeakable violence. Then we have the absurd canard that there is a “divide between Muslim and Christian communities.” There is no such divide. There is a divide within Islam between a large majority and a small minority of theocratic, extremist mass-murderers, men and women who have killed Muslim, Christian, and Jew alike, young and old, and almost always innocent bystanders in free societies. That small minority has terrorized large populations, enslaved women, killed Jews and homosexuals, launched a war against Western civilians, taken over whole countries, and targeted individual writers and thinkers for murder. With them we need a dialogue? With them we need an unremitting, unrelenting, unapologetic war. (Via Glenn Reynolds.)
Appallingly, the Guardian said that “We need to get beyond the them and us, the good guys and the bad guys.” I don’t think it’s unreasonable to imagine that a newspaper refuses to call the killing 200 innocent civilians “bad” might alter its records.
It’s very worrisome to me that there are so many people who think wars can be voted out of existence.
MORE: According to a UPI report, the election had less to do with Al Qaida than Aznar’s machinations:
[I]nterpreting these events as Spain’s surrender to terrorism would be gross oversimplification of the facts.
By voting Aznar and his Popular Party out of office and opting for the Spanish Socialist Labor Party — or SPOE — to lead them through these tumultuous times, Spaniards did not capitulate to terrorism — domestic or international — as many pundits have professed. Instead, Spaniards have chosen to send a clear message to their elected leaders. The message is: “Stop lying to us.”
As workers continue to untangle the twisted remains of Madrid’s ill-fated trains, another story is also starting to rapidly unfold — one of how Aznar tried to manipulate Thursday’s unfortunate events to his electoral advantage.
While all signs pointed to Islamist terrorists, Aznar incessantly tried to railroad public opinion into supporting the Basque thread.
Aznar now stands accused of “manipulating” the press following last Thursday’s murderous bombings that claimed 200 lives and wounded about 1,500 morning rush-hour commuters. (Link from Harry’s place, vis Glenn Reynolds.)
Manipulation of the press?
Can’t two play at that game? Who did “the press” favor before? Were they in fact “manipulated”?
Independent polls carried out on Wednesday, the day before the bombings, showed the Socialists ahead with a slight majority.
If this is true, then why the claim now of manipulation?
It seems to me that this claim would have been made regardless of who won the election. Surely Al Qaida realizes they had absolutely nothing to do with it. Maybe Bush is behind it all.
I don’t expect to hear much more about Zapatero and Kerry.
It’s none of my business.
IMPORTANT UPDATE: I guess I wasn’t paying enough attention, but the real issue seems to have finally surfaced. David Kaspar reports, via Germany’s number one news agency, that ZAPATERO IS CUTE:
Zapatero is a little like what many women imagine as the ideal son-in-law. He comes accross as charming and friendly with his boyish face. On top of that he is athletic, thin and good-looking.
I’m glad that’s settled! Appearances are everything!
EVEN MORE — AND EVEN MORE UNBELIEVABLE: Thank God for Google! The Majorca Daily Bulletin site from which I got the above story has pulled it. (At least it no longer works today, so you have to go to the Google cache. Unbelievable!)
This is almost enough to engender linkophobia.
Surely the Spanish press isn’t trying to “Kerry” favor?