John Kerry's wife...
Find a Conversation
| Sat, 08-14-2004 - 5:07pm |
being called that, by the way:
Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry. Married Senator Kerry in 1995. She only took his name eighteen months ago and she is an "interesting" paradox of conflicts.
If you think John Kerry was scary, he doesn't hold a candle to his wife. Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry was born in Mozambique, the daughter of a Portuguese physician, was educated in Switzerland and South Africa. Fluent in five languages, she was working as a United Nations interpreter in Geneva in the mid-60's when she met a "handsome" young American, H. John Heinz, III, who worked at a bank in Geneva. He told her his family was "in the food business."
They were married in 1966 and returned to Pittsburgh where his
family ran the giant H. J. Heinz food company. He was elected to the US House
of Representatives in 1971, and in 1976 he was elected to the first of
three terms in the United States Senate. (A Republican, he wrote a burning
diatribe against some of the causes backed by young House member John
Kerry.)
Several years later, in 1991, he was killed when his plane collided
with a Sun Oil Company helicopter over a Philadelphia suburb. The
senator, his pilot and copilot, and both of Sun's helicopter pilots were killed.
He was survived by his wife, Teresa, and their three young sons.
Four years later, having inherited Heinz's $500 million fortune,
she married Senator John Forbes Kerry, the liberal then-junior senator from
Massachusetts. She became a registered Democrat and the process of her
radicalization was set in motion.
Heinz Kerry is not shy about telling people that she required Kerry
to sign a prenuptial agreement before they were married John Kerry may not
have check writing privileges on the Heinz catsup and pickle fortune,
but he is certainly a willing and uncomplaining beneficiary of it. A lot of hard-earned money, made through many years of hawking catsup, mustard, and pickles, has fallen into the hands of two people who despise successful entrepreneurship and who believe in the confiscatory redistribution of wealth.
So how does Mrs. Heinz Kerry spend John Heinz's money? Just one example: According to the G2 Bulletin, an online intelligence newsletter of WorldNetDaily, in the years between 1995-2001 she gave more than $4 million to an organization called the Tides Foundation. And what does the Tides Foundation do with John Heinz's money? They support numerous antiwar groups, including Ramsey Clark's International Action Center. Clark has offered to defend Saddam Hussein when he's tried.
They support the Democratic Justice Fund, a joint venture of the
Tides Foundation and billionaire hate-monger George Soros. The Democratic
Justice Fund seeks to ease restrictions on Muslim immigration from "terrorist"
states. They support the Council for American-Islamic Relations, whose
leaders are known to have close ties to the terrorist group, Hamas.
They support the National Lawyers Guild, organized as a communist
front during the Cold War era. One of their attorneys, Lynne Stewart, has
been arrested for helping a client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate
with terror cells in Egypt. He is the convicted mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
They support the "Barrio Warriors," a radical Hispanic group whose
primary goal is to return all of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and
Texas to Mexico.
These are but a few of the radical groups that benefit, through the
anonymity provided by the Tides Foundation, from the generosity of our
would-be first lady, the wealthy widow of Republican senator John
Heinz, and now the wife of the Democratic senator who aspires to be the 44th
President of the United States.
Aiding and supporting our enemies is not good for America,
regardless of your political views.
If voters will open their eyes, educate themselves and see the real
Teresa Heinz Kerry, they will not appreciate her position as ultra rich
fairy godmother of the radical left. They will not want to imagine her
laying her head on a pillow each night inches away from the President
of the United States.
Hopefully they love this country enough to decide that the only way
these two will ever be allowed into the White House is with an engraved
invitation in hand.

Pages
Second, there's a difference between an attack based on truth and one that's just flat lies. Bush didn't show up for duty in Alabama. He wouldn't have had to make up the time if he did. We still don't know why. That's the record, a fact, not a smear. The company that purged thousands of eligible voters from the Florida rolls is connected to Bush. Perry, who is funding the Smearboat Vets, gave $20,000 to Bush's two campaigns for governor in the 1990s. He has given nearly $1 million to the Texas Republican Party. And Bush won't denounce the claims made by these vets, unlike John McCain and John Warner. And like the Democratic Party did when that Bush/Hitler ad was on the Moveon web site. Oh, and Kerry himself said that calling Bush AWOL was over the top language.
Third, I find it absolutely hysterical that the right is so disjointed over Michael Moore's little two hour movie. You've got Rush, Hannity and O'Reilly with THREE HOURS A DAY, and you want to get snippity over a two hour movie??? Geez. Sounds like you agree with Bush when he said it'd be alot easier to govern if this were a dictatorship.
'Bubba' isn't always derragatory, but in Clinton's case, that's how it was used.
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
True, but even in that case I wouldn't consider it a smear tactic or an attack on his character.
Bev
<<"Especially the way people are trying to erase anything religious from the government." <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Are those your words or not??? >>
How is that saying that I WANT religion in our government?
Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board
Sorry, but I'm not following the distinction you're making. I don 't see any difference in the use of Bubba for Clinton or
Renee ~~~
<>
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here because I do not see a difference.
Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board
I have recently, within the past month, I have been in Mexico. I have spoken with people in their everyday environments (a lot of Americans who travel abroad are constrained to the resorts) because these were not resort vacations but visits to my family members. The average people of these countries, at least the people wbo I spoke to, despise America, because, as I posted in another thread, it seems as if they have a better grasp on our foreign policies than we do.
Members of my immediate family have also recently traveled back to their country of origin (the Phillipines) and found themselves listening to similar complaints from friends and neighbors. I have actually been forbidden from visiting the Phillipines by my family, and have not been since before 9/11, because they are afraid of people assaulting or kidnapping me because I am obviously an American.
I also have relatives in Canada and Europe (Scottland) who expressed similar sentiment.
Additionally, my brother-in-law recently was in Italy, France, Spain, and England. He also said that during his sort-of grass roots tour of Europe, he encountered severe distrust towards Americans as well as A LOT of Europeans perceiving us as ignorant and unintelligent.
Finally, just on Saturday I attended a music festival at which several fairly popular artists were performing. On of which was Molotov, a rock band from Mexico City. They played about 10 during their set, probably 4 of which were directly against the Bush Administration (I can't names of the songs, because even though they were in Spainish, they are baaaaad!) At the end of their performance, the lead singer said (in not so many words) "We love you guys but we hate Bush , we all hate him down South!"
I know that this does not express the opinion of everyone, but it kind of gives you a taste of how we are perceived in the world by people who are not government but just average citezans like you and me.
The International Institute of Education which coordinates US students overseas tells their kids to pretend their Canadian. That's one.
90% of the cost of Desert Storm was paid by other countries. 90% of this operation is being paid by us. Other countries contributed approximately 300,000 troops to join the 545,000 from the US. Even France. Even Afghanistan. How anyone can say we have a global coalition now is beyond me. http://www.cryan.com/war/AlliedForces.html
You claim countries sending a handful of troops is evidence of global support of the Iraq war. Often because of loans and other goodies we gave them. Yet, countries whose outpouring of assistance came freely on 9/11 is disdained?? What kind of logic is that? Interesting that you mention some sniping that the US deserved it, I recall one of the Saudi's making a comment along those lines. The point is that the support was there, freely and naturally. A leader takes that opportunity and uses it for good. That didn't happen. Which you seem to understand since you say protesting a countries actions does not necessarily mean hate of the country. You're right, I should have more correctly said hate of George Bush.
Pages