Why Kerry?

This is the question that is starting to come up more and more as we approach Election Day. It seems that the Democrats continue to respond to this question in only one way - he isn't Bush, which in itself is pretty meaningless. At some point a candidate needs to tell us what he is for, not just what he is against. But when Kerry tries to do this, the only things that come out are platitudes and generalizations. On the crucial question of the day, World War IV, Kerry is everywhere and thus nowhere. He promises to fight terrorism better, with more "sensitivity". But beyond that he has said nothing. On the economy, he has said that he would do better and create more jobs, but without ever actually saying how he would do this. Only for so long can a candidate define himself negatively, and at this point, his lack of a positive self-definition is hurting Kerry. In most polls, people say that they don't know enough about him and though they are not thrilled with Bush still can't bring themselves to vote for an unknown quantity.

So what is it? Why does Kerry want to be President, and why do Democrats think they should control the government? The answer - as most answers to questions for Democrats come down to - is entitlement. In the words of James Lileks

So why does Kerry want to be president?

The reason is almost tautological: John Kerry wants to be president because he is John Kerry, and John Kerry is supposed to be president. Hence his campaign's flummoxed and tone-deaf response to the swift boat vets. Ban the books, sue the stations, retreat, attack. Underneath it all you can sense the confusion. How dare they attack Kerry? He's supposed to be president. It's almost treason in advance.

An obvious part of this sense of entitlement is one that has been around for a while, and is perfectly represented by this Howell Raines piece in the Washington Post, is that Democrats are obviously smarter than Republicans. And the fact that this has not been recognized by the general population infuriates them. Charles Krauthammer does a great job analyzing this issue.

Actually, this time around, even more apoplectic. The Democrats' current disdain for George Bush reminds me of another chess master, Efim Bogoljubov, who once said, "When I am White, I win because I am White" -- White moves first and therefore has a distinct advantage -- "when I am Black, I win because I am Bogoljubov." John Kerry is a man of similar vanity -- intellectual and moral -- and that spirit thoroughly permeates the Democratic Party.

Democrats feel a mixture of horror and contempt for the huddled masses -- so bovine, so benighted, so besotted with talk radio -- who made a king of an empty-headed movie star (Reagan, long before Arnold) and inexplicably want the Republicans' current nitwit leader to have a second term.

For a party that bills itself as democratic, this is about as anti-democratic as can be.