Posted on 07/08/2004 9:19:32 PM PDT by The Bandit
For the good of the country John Kerry’s quest for the White House should remain just that, a quest, a candidacy. Those words may sound harsh but if one simply looks at the facts of the matter--his voting record, his campaign stances, his proposals for the future, and his past actions--it is clear to see that a Kerry presidency would be a complete disaster for this country.
John Kerry’s ability to work with others in the political arena has led to him being instrumental in a whopping eight pieces of legislation. Of those eight, five were ceremonial in nature, two related to the fishing industry, and one had to do with federal grants for female owned small businesses. For someone who has been in the Senate as long as Kerry, this record proves one of two things: he is either completely ineffective as a legislator or his agenda is so far from the mainstream that even his Democratic colleagues can’t in all honesty vote for the bills he proposes. Either way, his past political productivity is such that it would be hard to imagine him getting any ''tight vote'' legislation passed on Capitol Hill. In contrast we have seen President Bush do this on several occasions…successfully.
Throughout the 2004 presidential campaign, the country has seen John Kerry take both sides on a plethora of issues. While this may have been an effective campaign tactic when local media coverage was the only media coverage, we now live in the world of 24-hour news and embedded media correspondents. Two of the most glaring examples of John Kerry’s need to say everything to all people are: a) his contention that he owned SUV’s while talking to a crowd dominated by auto union people in the Detroit area and his rejection of that contention when talking to a conservation group, and b) his recent declaration that life begins at conception in the face of his ''no vote'' on the partial-birth abortion ban.
The list of issues his two faces address is shockingly in-depth: trade with China, the Iraq war, eliminating the marriage penalty for the middle class, the Patriot Act, the gay marriage issue, the death penalty for terrorists, the No Child Left Behind Act, affirmative action, ethanol, sanctions on Cuba, NAFTA, double taxation on dividends, and two of the biggest and most important, raising taxes on small business and individuals during a time of needed economic growth.
Simply put, it would be extremely difficult to take John Kerry at his word no matter what he says he supports because he is playing the political pandering game. He is saying everything to all people simply to get elected. He would be, to use a rough analogy, a potluck president. By contrast President Bush has shown true conviction even in the face of the attack-dog mentality displayed by the media and the liberal-left, to his detriment many times.
Then we have Kerry’s proposals for the future. Almost every economist worth the title has looked at Kerry’s economic proposals with a raised eyebrow. Two of the more worrisome elements of Kerry’s economic prescription for disaster include his unrealistic depiction of how an upper-class tax hike would affect our deficit and what the total sum of his social programs would cost.
First, Kerry has repeatedly said he favors the Bush tax cuts for ''working class'' Americans but has insisted that if elected he would eliminate any relief for the uppermost tax bracket or the ''very wealthy.'' The reality of the matter is that the tax rate cuts for the ''very wealthy'' have only accounted for a minuscule portion of the deficit and, if rescinded, will reduce future deficits by a scant three-tenths of one percent of gross domestic product. In other words, it sounds good on paper but doesn’t really do much.
Second, a report by the National Taxpayers Union exposes how Kerry’s newly proposed federal government spending would add more than $265 billion to the federal budget each year. Now, where do you think the funding for these programs is going to come from? You have a choice; it is either higher deficits or what Hillary Clinton proposed doing in a recent speech in California, raising taxes.
But perhaps the single most important issue in the 2004 election, national security and the War on Terror, has Kerry at his weakest.
In the shadow of the United Nations Oil-for-Food scandal and the U.N.'s dismal reaction to the genocide currently taking place in Sudan, Kerry is still calling for the United States to court the ''international community'' – what he really means is France, Germany and Russia – to help in rebuilding and securing Iraq. This statement of intent to include these three governments meets with two obvious flaws: 1) They don’t want to send any of their own troops and they are standing in the way of NATO doing the same, and 2) including these governments after they have been exposed as colluding with Saddam Hussein to embezzle from the Iraqi people would be tantamount to inviting the fox into the hen house. It is a recipe for disaster.
With regard to the War on Terror, Kerry is guilty of playing politics with an issue involving an enemy who has literally declared war on the United State. Kerry would rather do the dance at the corrupt alter of the United Nations, acquiescing to countries that voted against removing a man from power who commits genocide while perpetrating narcissistic financial misdeeds. He and his surrogates have misled the American people on the issues that brought us to remove Hussein from power by focusing on one issue out of many. His intentions are disingenuous and, should there be another attack on American soil the magnitude of September 11, he and his surrogates will have to shoulder their share of the guilt due to their shortsighted, ideological agenda. That agenda would force the sovereignty of the United States to bend to the will of the international community no matter how manipulated and slanted against the United States.
The people who served with Kerry in Vietnam – you did know that he served in Vietnam, right? – perhaps said it best. Rear Admiral Roy Hoffmann, USN (retired), commander of Coastal Surveillance Force Vietnam, said: ''I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be the commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust…'' This statement comes from those Kerry calls his ''band of brothers.''
A Kerry presidency would be a disaster for the United States of America. Allowing this man to attain the highest office in the land, the ability to command our troops, the stewardship of our economy, and the ability to appoint individuals to the Supreme Court would be the biggest mistake the voters of this country has ever made. John Kerry cannot win. Our well-being as a nation depends on it.
Flush the Two Johns...........BUMP
You just made the list,pal!
Sincerely,The Hair.
I am confident he will not win. He is the best the Dems have and they don't have much anymore. He is like Dole, it was his turn but he will be beat. Money got him as far as he can go but Americans are not like Mass., they are smarter.
I have a lefty friend (we stay friends by rarely discussing politics) that confided in me a few weeks ago that he and his lefty commrades think very little of Kerry. They don't hold much hope of him winning this election.
Not 'perhaps' but absolute. See tagline.
Al Gore gave me some fear. AL GORE! Kerry does not give me the same feeling and I am not worried. He just does not have it and I bet there are probably 60 or more senators that could run better campaigns than him.
Bump worthy!
Bush - 318
Kerry - 217
"Oh, but if we'd only maintained better alliances with the other settlers, this might not be happening."
"Mom, I'm gonna take dad's gun and go out and shoot some Indians."
"But son, where does he keep the bullets?"
"I know where dad keeps everything, even those magazines with nasty pictures."
"Nasty pictures?"
"Yeah, hey, see if you can get him up, looks like he's had a few too many though."
"Son, are you sure you want to do this?" "We could wait for the others to come rescue us."
"No problem ma. It's the least I can do in return for your up-rooting the entire family and taking us to this God-forsaken land. I miss my girlfriend a lot but she hardly compares to blasting savages on a friday night."
"Best of luck, son."
"Thanks, ma."
Having been the first one to say that this would turn into a repeat of the 1984 election, I think it's time for me to start picking stocks.
bttt
"OOOOOO kids ,it's Doris Day.It's so scary her face fills the whole screen" man I miss SCTV.
I hope you are right, but I think most demon rats, even if they do not like Kerry much, will still vote for him. Some of the people I talk to just amaze me with their support of Kerry, so I am not too confident in many Americans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.