The Highest of Stakes -- On Bush, Kerry, and Islamism
Sometimes an outsider can see a problem and its solutions better than those that are embroiled in the fray. British historian, Paul Johnson has clearly and succinctly compared Bush and Kerry, giving six reasons why Kerry SHOULD NOT be elected.
Kerry is untrustworthy for six reasons:
1. Kerry seems to have no strong convictions about what he would do if given office and power. I have waited for Kerry to tell us what he would do, to explain his plans. Instead he regales us with attacks on Bush and promises to do better, to be more efficient, to plan better, to make up with our "allies," and so on. What is your plan, sir? He could not be hired at a firm with so little conviction as to what he could do for them. Nor would a business or government agency accept a bid for a project that doesn't give specificity. If he were to appear on Donald Trump's "The Apprentice" television show, the Donald would soon give him the "You're fired" treatment for failing to come up with a credible plan. Why should the American people expect any less?
2. Kerry&'s personal character, so far, has appeared in a bad light. He is fundamentally dishonest about a variety of subjects, including his background. He is not Irish nor a Boston Catholic but of Germanic Judaism, ironic in that Anti-Semitism is on the rise again in Europe where Kerry seems to be the darling of the European elite and that Islam disdains all things Jewish! An example is that Kerry's religious views reflect a Leftist flavor that he showed when answering the question on abortion. It is hard to tell whether or not Kerry believes in God. Many Americans don't seem to care whether or not they do. They would prefer that a candidate has religious beliefs, but they want to be to tell IF the candidate has a belief, and with Kerry you can't.
3. Kerry has a long record of contradictions and uncertainties as a senator and his apparent inability to pursue a consistent policy on major issues. Indeed there is Kerry's twenty-year paltry senate record, really disgraceful for such a long career. Not only is he missing a track record, his voting record is contradictory. The accusation of flip-flopping on issues is valid.
4. Posturing on his military record. Kerry made his record an issue and continues to hide some of the paperwork. Some people find distasteful his self-promotion while in the service. Others see his behavior after the war as disgraceful or worse. Apparently he believed that Americans would take ANY veteran of a shooting war over one that merely serviced in the National Guard, and he believed that thirty years would erase the memories of those vets that served in that theater. One wonders what the serving military think of all of this. Could they actually serve under a commander-in-chief with such a controversial record?
5...his disturbing lifestyle, combining liberal--”even radical"--politics with being husband, in succession, of two heiresses, one worth $300 million and the other $1 billion. As both Bush and Kerry are sons of America's elite, it is not surprising that Kerry would rub shoulders and marry within his social class. However, the lifestyle of the Kerrys is buttressed by the usual team of lawyers and financial advisors to provide the best methods of tax avoidance. (my emphasis) I find this alone to be disgraceful and hypocritical on Kerry's part repeatedly has complained about the fact that wealthy Americans have benefited from the Bush tax break. Furthermore, although he legally can't use his wife's funds in his campaign, he benefits from her enormous wealth in other ways. Additionally, Teresa Heinz has refused to disclose her own financial statements, nor has it been explained if or how her funds would be set up in a blind trust as have the assets of all previous presidents and first ladies. THIS IS TROUBLING. Teresa Heinz could continue to wield enormous power if she keeps control of her assets and manages her foundations during the period she serves as First Lady. While complaining about the environment and the wastefulness of Americans, the Kerry's cavalierly continue to maintain five palatial homes, drive large cars, fly private jets and vacation using personal motor craft, at the least an hypocrisy.
6. is the Kerry team: who seem to combine considerable skills in electioneering with a variety of opinions on all key issues. <.i> We are judged by the company we keep and by the choice of our spouse. We can start with John Edwards, a trial lawyer who has been characterized as "an ambulance chaser." The unsuitability of this choice screams as the issue of the lack of and the high cost of health care is one that is hammered home by the Kerry team. John Edwards has become very wealthy by any standard by suing doctors, obstetricians. Medical doctors are fleeing the profession and refusing to perform certain procedures because they can no longer afford high malpractice insurance. Costs for the public are rising. Could it be that John Edwards and his pals in the trial lawyer association are partly responsible. As of yet, I haven't heard either Kerry or Edwards tell us what they plan to do about the lawyers!
George Soros is another very troubling influence. FrontPage Magazine online has a thorough two part expose´ of Soros. Although it is a lengthy sixty-two pages, it is well worth the effort to become familiar with the man that very well could run the monetary policy of the United States should Kerry be elected. Here is what Johnson has to say about Soros:
We always expect that the American Left would oppose Bush and showbiz types are lining up in droves. It is troubling that some, if not many Americans that don't know anything about the issues will vote for one candidate or the other simply because of the endorsement of their favorite performer. For this reason, the tyranny of the ignorant masses, our forefathers wisely created the Electoral College. I thank them for the insightfulness.
More troubling are the intellectuals on the Left, here in America and overseas, especially in Europe, that have lined up against Bush. The Bush-haters cover a wide spectrum. Last week I read of a British columnist that wrote a column advocating paying an assassin to take out Bush. Others are those we expect: Chirac of France, many intellectuals that have backed left-wing causes, and the "superbureacrats of Brussels"of the E.U.!" Although not alone in his observation, Johnson has noticed that "Anti-Americanism, like anti-Semitism, is not, of course, a rational reflex. It is, rather, a mental disease, and the Continentals are currently suffering from a virulent spasm of the infection, as always happens when America exerts strong and unbending leadership.(my emphasis)
And the last of Johnson's villains are the elements of the anarchy and unrest in the Middle East and Muslim Asia and Africa that are clamoring and praying for a Kerry victory.(my emphasis) These are those that will stand to profit in some way politically, financially, and emotionally from the breakdown of order, the eclipse of democracy, and the defeat of the rule of law. They want to see Bush replaced.
This is the Jihad connection. The terrorists are not only those that strap on the bombs and maim and kill. The terror enablers are those that send them out, that financiers that will make a bundle in manipulating the price of oil during a period of crisis, that manufacture and sell arms and munitions to all sides, that house and comfort the bombers, and the clerics that fill their heads with Koranic passages and make the Jihadis heroes in the eyes of the Islamic masses. "It is only business; It is our religion;" the justification of the terror enablers. Some of THESE terrorists are even on our shores, walking among us.
Sometimes an outsider can see a problem and its solutions better than those that are embroiled in the fray. British historian, Paul Johnson has clearly and succinctly compared Bush and Kerry, giving six reasons why Kerry SHOULD NOT be elected.
Kerry is untrustworthy for six reasons:
1. Kerry seems to have no strong convictions about what he would do if given office and power. I have waited for Kerry to tell us what he would do, to explain his plans. Instead he regales us with attacks on Bush and promises to do better, to be more efficient, to plan better, to make up with our "allies," and so on. What is your plan, sir? He could not be hired at a firm with so little conviction as to what he could do for them. Nor would a business or government agency accept a bid for a project that doesn't give specificity. If he were to appear on Donald Trump's "The Apprentice" television show, the Donald would soon give him the "You're fired" treatment for failing to come up with a credible plan. Why should the American people expect any less?
2. Kerry&'s personal character, so far, has appeared in a bad light. He is fundamentally dishonest about a variety of subjects, including his background. He is not Irish nor a Boston Catholic but of Germanic Judaism, ironic in that Anti-Semitism is on the rise again in Europe where Kerry seems to be the darling of the European elite and that Islam disdains all things Jewish! An example is that Kerry's religious views reflect a Leftist flavor that he showed when answering the question on abortion. It is hard to tell whether or not Kerry believes in God. Many Americans don't seem to care whether or not they do. They would prefer that a candidate has religious beliefs, but they want to be to tell IF the candidate has a belief, and with Kerry you can't.
3. Kerry has a long record of contradictions and uncertainties as a senator and his apparent inability to pursue a consistent policy on major issues. Indeed there is Kerry's twenty-year paltry senate record, really disgraceful for such a long career. Not only is he missing a track record, his voting record is contradictory. The accusation of flip-flopping on issues is valid.
4. Posturing on his military record. Kerry made his record an issue and continues to hide some of the paperwork. Some people find distasteful his self-promotion while in the service. Others see his behavior after the war as disgraceful or worse. Apparently he believed that Americans would take ANY veteran of a shooting war over one that merely serviced in the National Guard, and he believed that thirty years would erase the memories of those vets that served in that theater. One wonders what the serving military think of all of this. Could they actually serve under a commander-in-chief with such a controversial record?
5...his disturbing lifestyle, combining liberal--”even radical"--politics with being husband, in succession, of two heiresses, one worth $300 million and the other $1 billion. As both Bush and Kerry are sons of America's elite, it is not surprising that Kerry would rub shoulders and marry within his social class. However, the lifestyle of the Kerrys is buttressed by the usual team of lawyers and financial advisors to provide the best methods of tax avoidance. (my emphasis) I find this alone to be disgraceful and hypocritical on Kerry's part repeatedly has complained about the fact that wealthy Americans have benefited from the Bush tax break. Furthermore, although he legally can't use his wife's funds in his campaign, he benefits from her enormous wealth in other ways. Additionally, Teresa Heinz has refused to disclose her own financial statements, nor has it been explained if or how her funds would be set up in a blind trust as have the assets of all previous presidents and first ladies. THIS IS TROUBLING. Teresa Heinz could continue to wield enormous power if she keeps control of her assets and manages her foundations during the period she serves as First Lady. While complaining about the environment and the wastefulness of Americans, the Kerry's cavalierly continue to maintain five palatial homes, drive large cars, fly private jets and vacation using personal motor craft, at the least an hypocrisy.
6. is the Kerry team: who seem to combine considerable skills in electioneering with a variety of opinions on all key issues. <.i> We are judged by the company we keep and by the choice of our spouse. We can start with John Edwards, a trial lawyer who has been characterized as "an ambulance chaser." The unsuitability of this choice screams as the issue of the lack of and the high cost of health care is one that is hammered home by the Kerry team. John Edwards has become very wealthy by any standard by suing doctors, obstetricians. Medical doctors are fleeing the profession and refusing to perform certain procedures because they can no longer afford high malpractice insurance. Costs for the public are rising. Could it be that John Edwards and his pals in the trial lawyer association are partly responsible. As of yet, I haven't heard either Kerry or Edwards tell us what they plan to do about the lawyers!
George Soros is another very troubling influence. FrontPage Magazine online has a thorough two part expose´ of Soros. Although it is a lengthy sixty-two pages, it is well worth the effort to become familiar with the man that very well could run the monetary policy of the United States should Kerry be elected. Here is what Johnson has to say about Soros:
George Soros, a man who made billions through the kind of unscrupulous manipulations that (in Marxist folklore) characterize "finanance capitalism." This is the man who did everything in his power to wreck the currency of Britain, America's principal ally, during the EU exchange-rate crisis--not out of conviction but simply to make vast sums of money. He has also used his immense resources to interfere in the domestic affairs of half a dozen other countries, some of them small enough for serious meddling to be hard to resist.
Johnson asks the same question as do I: Why is a man like Soros so eager to see Kerry in the White House? The question is especially pertinent since he is not alone among the superrich wishing to see Bush beaten. There are several other huge fortunes backing Kerry. (my emphasis)
We always expect that the American Left would oppose Bush and showbiz types are lining up in droves. It is troubling that some, if not many Americans that don't know anything about the issues will vote for one candidate or the other simply because of the endorsement of their favorite performer. For this reason, the tyranny of the ignorant masses, our forefathers wisely created the Electoral College. I thank them for the insightfulness.
More troubling are the intellectuals on the Left, here in America and overseas, especially in Europe, that have lined up against Bush. The Bush-haters cover a wide spectrum. Last week I read of a British columnist that wrote a column advocating paying an assassin to take out Bush. Others are those we expect: Chirac of France, many intellectuals that have backed left-wing causes, and the "superbureacrats of Brussels"of the E.U.!" Although not alone in his observation, Johnson has noticed that "Anti-Americanism, like anti-Semitism, is not, of course, a rational reflex. It is, rather, a mental disease, and the Continentals are currently suffering from a virulent spasm of the infection, as always happens when America exerts strong and unbending leadership.(my emphasis)
And the last of Johnson's villains are the elements of the anarchy and unrest in the Middle East and Muslim Asia and Africa that are clamoring and praying for a Kerry victory.(my emphasis) These are those that will stand to profit in some way politically, financially, and emotionally from the breakdown of order, the eclipse of democracy, and the defeat of the rule of law. They want to see Bush replaced.
This is the Jihad connection. The terrorists are not only those that strap on the bombs and maim and kill. The terror enablers are those that send them out, that financiers that will make a bundle in manipulating the price of oil during a period of crisis, that manufacture and sell arms and munitions to all sides, that house and comfort the bombers, and the clerics that fill their heads with Koranic passages and make the Jihadis heroes in the eyes of the Islamic masses. "It is only business; It is our religion;" the justification of the terror enablers. Some of THESE terrorists are even on our shores, walking among us.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home