Posted on 10/04/2004 3:06:29 AM PDT by SeaBiscuit
Endorsement: George W. Bush for president
It's about national security.
That's the key issue on the minds of Americans planning to vote in the Nov. 2 presidential election.
They must decide whether Republican President George W. Bush or Sen. John F. Kerry, a Democrat, can provide the leadership to safeguard America from foreign terrorism.
Americans aren't fools. They know that without safe cities and towns, America will lose its greatness. Our cherished freedoms and sacred liberties will be diminished, along with our opportunities for economic prosperity and our basic pursuit of happiness.
Our children and their children will live vastly different lives if we fail to guarantee a future free of turmoil.
Islamic extremists, both here and abroad, have one purpose: To destroy America and halt the spread of democracy and religious tolerance around the globe.
OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS SECTION 10/4/2004 - Crash in police chase kills one, injures one - Finneran legacy rests in the eye of the beholder - How Meehan raises his millions - New Lowelians: Businesswoman's dream comes alive downtown
They'd like to be plotting in our streets right now. They'd like to be sowing murder and mayhem with suicide bombers and hostage-takings, and spreading fear in the heartland and everywhere else. They'd like to be wearing us down and bringing our nation to its knees.
Since the devastating terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, one American leader has maintained an unbending resolve to protect our homeland and interest against Islamic savages and those foreign governments appeasing them.
That leader is President Bush.
While out-of-touch U.S. politicians and world leaders have attacked President Bush's tactics, they can't question his steely commitment to keep America safe.
In the ashes of ground zero, where nearly 3,000 innocent Americans perished, President Bush vowed to find the perpetrators, in domestic cells and distant lands, and bring them to justice. He said he will do all that is humanly possible and necessary to make certain that terrorists never strike again on U.S. soil.
Can anyone deny that President Bush has not delivered? America the terrorists' No. 1 target has recovered from its tragic wounds and rebounded. It remains safe to this day.
What might a lesser leader have done, faced with the daunting task of deciding America's course against withering, partisan attacks from Democrats, media propagandists, disingenuous U.N. officials and disloyal White House operatives selling their souls for profit during a time of war?
A lesser leader might have caved in. President Bush has stood his ground.
In this year's election, the question isn't whether we are safer now than we were four years ago. We already know the answer. Sure we are and that's because of President Bush. The critical question is: Four years from now, will America be safer than it is today?
In our book, Americans have to place their trust in President Bush. He's proven to be as sturdy as a mighty oak when it comes to saying what he means, meaning what he says and acting decisively.
When it comes to the war on terror, President Bush means to keep our military strong and our country secure.
John Kerry, on the other hand, has all the attributes of the shape of water when it comes to telling us what he believes and what he'd do for America. Like incoming and outgoing tides, Kerry is content to go with the flow. In a dangerous world infested with sharks, Kerry would be chum at America's expense.
We in Massachusetts know John Kerry. He got his first taste of politics 32 years ago in the cities and towns of Greater Lowell.
In his 20 years in the U.S. Senate, Kerry, a Navy war hero, hasn't risen above the rank of seaman for his uninspiring legislative record. He's been inconsistent on major issues. First he's for the 1991 Persian Gulf War, then he opposes it. First he's for the war in Iraq, then he's against it. First he's for a strong U.S. defense, then he votes against military weapons programs. First he's for the U.S. Patriot Act, then he opposes it.
Kerry's solution to stop terrorism? He'd go to the U.N. and build a consensus. How naive. France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and other Iraq oil-for-food scam artists don't want America to succeed. They want us brought down to their level. And more and more, Kerry sounds just like them. In a recent campaign speech, Kerry said America was in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
No doubt John Kerry sincerely wants to serve his country, but we believe he's the wrong man, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Americans should think back three years ago to the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center. There among the mist lay the images and memories of fallen firefighters, police, a Catholic chaplain and ordinary working citizens moms, dads, sons, daughters.
President Bush, through heartfelt tears, told us never to forget the twisted carnage and the massacre of the innocents. Yet some of us are forgetting.
President Bush told us the attacks must never happen again. Yet some of us are wavering because of the brave sacrifice of soldiers that our nation's security demands.
Well, President Bush hasn't forgotten. Nor has he lost the courage and conviction to do what is right for America.
We know if there is one thing the enemy fears above all else, it is that George Bush's iron will is stronger than his iron won't.
The Sun proudly endorses the
re-election of President George W. Bush.
If I'm not mistaken, W's hometown paper did the same to him.
This is a great endorsement! I'd like to see the RNC use the "Wrong Man, Wrong Place, Wrong time" in a ad slogan about Lurch.
Reported here about a week or so ago was that a Crawford TX paper (circulation 425) endorsed Lurch.
Anyone know if the Lowell Sun has a larger distribution than that?
Thanks for posting this. I wonder if this will get as much play in the media as the Crawford, Texas paper endorsement of Kerry. There was a good post on FR the other day about the Crawford paper endorsement and what was really behind it.
I've been to Crawford. A small Texas town with about 900 people who mostly support Bush. Hot is the summer and cold in the winter.
What is Kerry's connection to Lowell?
It's been a long, long time since working-class Lowell was his home town.
Quite a bit larger.
This was a much better article than the one in the crawford paper about Bush.
I don't know what Kerry's connection in that town is. Maybe he pushed someone out of a line there at one time.
it says Hometown, so maybe that's where he was hatched, and developed his snotty attitude.
Lowell's Sun has a larger circulation than Crawford's 450, I'm quite sure. And since most of those 450 have dropped their subscriptions, I think Crawford may be in the market for a new weekly soon.
So maybe that's why they don't like him, he is just snotty,
"His ambition tempered only by political naivete, Kerry tried on congressional districts like suits off the rack."
That is why sKerry is the most unlikely democrat candidate in history. He represents everything the loony left who are supporting him hate!
Interesting story. "oppertunist" is an understatement.
" early February, Kerry's wife, Julia, bought a house in Worcester, where Kerry intended to take on Harold D. Donohue, a longtime Democratic incumbent, in a central Massachusetts district. They never moved in. Instead, the couple rented an apartment in Lowell late in March after learning that Representative F. Bradford Morse would be named undersecretary general of the United Nations. His departure would open up the Fifth District seat held by Republicans for generations.
Kerry had tenuous ties to the Fifth District that proved to be a flimsy shield against the withering assaults of critics. Leading the attack was The Sun, the conservative daily in Lowell, the old, parochial mill city that anchored the district.
Resentment poured from many of the other nine candidates, whom Kerry would leave in the dust of a freewheeling Democratic primary.
In the wait-your-turn political culture of Lowell and nearby Lawrence, Kerry was a carpetbagger trying to cherrypick a seat in Congress.
In the general election campaign, Kerry was lashed relentlessly by The Sun, which questioned his patriotism, his loyalty to the district, and his financial backers. He blew a huge lead and lost to the Republican nominee, Paul W. Cronin, a former state representative who had served on Morse's staff.
Suddenly, the fast track to political glory vanished beneath the feet of the war hero turned war protester. There would be no official soapbox in the nation's capital, not any time soon at least. Kerry's first campaign for elected office had failed. And he was unemployed.
In defeat, he retreated to the outskirts of politics. ``The years in exile'' is how Cameron F. Kerry describes the next decade of his older brother's life."
Well, what he does stand for I do find quite sKerry.
"without safe cities and towns, America will lose its greatness. "
That says it all.
"To win the primary, the newcomer overcame the election eve arrest of his brother, Cameron, and campaign field director Thomas J. Vallely, both then 22, in the basement of a Lowell building that housed the headquarters of Kerry and another Democratic contender, state Representative Anthony R. DiFruscia of Lawrence. It was almost 2 a.m. - 30 hours before the polls opened - when the two were arrested on charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny. That day's Sun blared a memorable, double-deck headline: "Kerry brother arrested in Lowell `Watergate."' DiFruscia, getting some extra ink in the campaign's waning hours, had drawn the parallel to the break-in at Democratic headquarters in Washington three months earlier. The Kerry camp declared it a setup, saying that the two responded to an anonymous phone call, minutes earlier, threatening to cut the campaign's 36 phone lines on the day before its get-out-the-vote effort. Lowell Police arrested the pair in an area near the trunk line for all of the building's phones. To this day Kerry becomes animated talking about the episode, convinced it was part of a conspiracy against his insurgency. He said he does not know who was involved. He dismissed as ridiculous the charge that DiFruscia was a target. "He didn't figure in the race," said Kerry. But some of Kerry's claims in the Lowell break-in are wildly at odds with the facts...."
"To win the primary, the newcomer overcame the election eve arrest of his brother, Cameron, and campaign field director Thomas J. Vallely, both then 22, in the basement of a Lowell building that housed the headquarters of Kerry and another Democratic contender, state Representative Anthony R. DiFruscia of Lawrence. It was almost 2 a.m. - 30 hours before the polls opened - when the two were arrested on charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny."
That day's Sun blared a memorable, double-deck headline: "Kerry brother arrested in Lowell `Watergate."' DiFruscia, getting some extra ink in the campaign's waning hours, had drawn the parallel to the break-in at Democratic headquarters in Washington three months earlier.
The Kerry camp declared it a setup, saying that the two responded to an anonymous phone call, minutes earlier, threatening to cut the campaign's 36 phone lines on the day before its get-out-the-vote effort. Lowell Police arrested the pair in an area near the trunk line for all of the building's phones."
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.