SPIKESMYGOD
Member
"My fellow Americans. Today, we have been attacked in a way which far surpasses the tragedy of 9/11."
I don't know about you guys, but these are words which I NEVER wish to hear coming over the airwaves from the Oval Office. Thankfully, we are in a great position to make sure this stays just a nightmare. If we reelect President Bush, this horrible event has very little chance of ever coming to fruition. And unlike the liberal fearmongering about such ghosts as social security checks being taken away & the draft, this one would have a real possibility of arising under a Kerry admi...a..I can't even say it!
Not since the Reagan/Carter election have we been faced with such a stark difference in the choice of leader. Had Carter won in 1980, there is a very good chance that we would have seen a Soviet Union determined to hang on, if not launch an attack which would have led to a nuclear holocaust. Only due to Reagan's clear vision of good & evil and his military buildup did we avert such an unprecedented disaster. Now, we are in a very similar position. President Bush, upon paying for the sins of neglect made by Bill Clinton, has prosecuted the War on Terror in a manner which has not only kept us safe since that fateful day in September, but he has liberated 50 million people, two nations, and has the terrorists hiding & fighting for their sheer survival- most of the Taliban & two-thirds of Al Qaeda have been killed or captured, and bin Laden is either dead or ordering Domino's pizza from a cave address. Anyone who thinks that Kerry would not reverse course in a disastrous manner must be pissing a LOT of "Koolade."
Over the years, Kerry has shown time & again that he is a creature of the 60's, inexorably controlled by the Vietnam/Woodstock Syndrome. He believes that the military is evil. Yes, I said it....EVIL! He called his fellow soldiers in Nam war criminals (What? You hadn't heard that he spent 129 days in Vietnam?), though now he claims that he was talking about Nixon & the politicians. I'm sorry, how could Nixon have committed the crimes Kerry enumerated? You remember, right?
(In a very thick, over-the-top, goofy Boston accent)
"The pulling on ears, the tweaking of noses, the poking of eyes in a fashion reminiscent of the Three Stooges."
Yeah, now you remember. Strange when discussing the Abu Ghraib incident he not only damned the soldiers, but he also made damn sure to say that the culpability went "all the way to the top." Gee, that sounds very familiar. That's right, that came straight from his '71 testimony- or as I say, treason. See, this man has not changed a bit from his hippie days. He still believes the military is an instrument of evil. He still believes that the President- Bush, in this case- enjoys waging war for the sake of waging war. He still believes that America is a corrupt bully, spreading its flawed ideology of freedom & democracy by use of force. He still believes that the U.N. & the international community are the righteous balance to that corrupt American imperialistic proclivity. Also, sadly, he refuses to believe in good & evil, though I have a feeling that Kerry would describe America as the latter.
President Bush, on the other hand, believes in the innate goodness of America. Yes, we have had our dark moments over the last 200 or so years, but now, today, we are the force for good that fights the evil in this increasingly lethal world. President Bush believes that the intrinsic order of the human spirit is the desire to be free & to live in peace. John Kerry & his fellow liberals will tell you that it is not our right to force freedom upon other peoples. I tell you it is not THEIR right to stand in our way when we attempt to give the downtrodden at least the choice. If you believe that the natural order of the human spirit is to be free, then you must side with President Bush: The true visionary of our time.
Now, let me make the case that many Republicans in office are too scared to make. While the reason for the war against the Taliban & Al Qaeda in Afghanistan is self-evident- unless you are a Hamburgler liberal- the case for Iraq is more subtle and yet so simple, though very controversial to American defeatists & haters. The war in Iraq was never totally about WMD's, never totally about Saddam, and never really about freeing the Iraqi people, though that is icing on the cake and a victory for the human spirit. No, the war in Iraq is about position & influence. When President Bush declared war on terror after 9/11, it was inevitable that we, in order to win, had to change the face of the Middle East. Now, we have freed Afghanistan, we have freed Iraq, Libya has capitulated, Sudan is flipping toward us, Saudi Arabia has been put on high alert concerning its links to terrorism, and Musharif's Pakistan has become a strong ally in this apocalyptic battle. Iran, one of the two remaining members of the Axis of Evil, is hell-bent on becoming a nuclear power, one which openly supports & funds terrorism. Well, my friends, it's an all new ball game now that we have moved into the neighborhood. We have Iran sandwiched between Afghanistan & Iraq, putting us in a perfect geographical location from where we can either monitor its evil actions or, Joss forbid, attack it in the event the regime becomes too provocative in its actions. Every breath they take they must worry about having been infiltrated- as they have done to us in Iraq. They now must worry that we can monitor their every move. They must now concern themselves that we could be in Tehran airspace before they can say, "The Great Satan must die."
See, it's very obvious. The majority of Iranians hate the mullah-led regime and are waiting for its inevitable fall. The more pressure we can mount against Iran, the greater the likelihood that the regime will falter more quickly and that the Iranian people will rise up. Beyond that, we will be able to short-circuit a full-on assault on Iran by Israel. Face it, even if we had never gone into Iraq, an Israeli/Iranian war would have drawn us into that region, ANYWAY! Since this, what with Iran's race for long-range missiles & nukes, is still a possibility, doesn't it make more sense to have the best geographical position and to have changed as many Mid-East regimes into allies? Once Iran falls, Syria will become so isolated that it will wither on the vine.
A liberal like Clinton or Kerry, upon being attacked on 9/11, would have no doubt responded. However, they would have only made cosmetic, surgical missile strikes upon certain locations, claimed they got the bad guys, and called it a day. Basically, they would have killed a couple hornets but would have happily left the festering nest, praying we don't get stung again. Well, President Bush has decided that the only way to protect ourselves is to get out the Raid & kill the entire nest. Sure, a few will get away, but they will no longer have a nest from which to train & base. The terrorists have already lost numerous regimes that supported & accomodated them......and the news only gets worse for them. Sure, they can hole up in Fallujah for a while, but only to catch their breath. Also, there will never come a day when Karzai or Allawi or Musharif- or it seems Qaddafi, now- will hand over WMD's to these murderous thugs, assuming Bush's vision of a new Mid-East comes to fruition. Yes, there are a lot of problems which have, can, & will occur, but the only other choice is to elect Kerry, retreat, hide under a rug, and pray these thugs lose our address.
Oh, in addition to 9/11, let's not forget another one of Clinton's legacies: North Korea. Yes, let's have bilateral talks with Kim Jong Il & his lackeys, agree to let them have a "peaceful" nuclear program, give aid, declare victory, and walk away. Gee, that went well. OOPS! Wait, now they have nukes. I guess Kim Jong Il & his goons WEREN'T the good ole boys Clinton & his administration thought they were, huh? Oh, I forgot, they "tricked us," or so Madeleine Albright proclaimed. Seems things have gotten so bad you can't even trust a brutal dictator! Actually, it seems that the French & the U.N. can't be trusted, either. Still, Kerry would solve all of that with a global test, a test where only America & freedom fail to make the grade. But don't you worry because Kerry has a "plan" for everything........just don't ask for details.
Kerry has voted against nearly every weapons program we use. He was in favor of what would have resulted in a unilateral nuclear freeze during the Cold War. He sided with communists like Ortega, this even though Ortega, after Kerry & his fellow liberals defended Ortega against the communist charge made by Republicans, flew to Moscow for a reward of millions of filthy commie dollars- gee, I guess Kerry got "tricked." He praises France & the corrupt Useless Nations, yet demeans our TRUE allies, even going so far as to call them "bribed" & "coerced"- this though it turns out that the U.N., France & others were REALLY the "bribed." He calls PM Allawi a puppet and refuses to acknowledge the contribution made by the thousands of Iraqi police & soldiers, many of whom have given their lives for their country. Kerry believes the War on Terror is more of an intelligence & law enforcement issue. Well, even after the first WTC attack in 1993 he proposed a 6.5 billion dollar cut in intelligence, and he has vowed to gut the Patriot Act. Gee, I guess that WOULD leave us with "spitballs."
Just like the spokesperson for Kerry's party, The Hamburgler, Kerry believes that there is no real terrorist threat, though not going as far as Moore, calling the terrorists "freedom fighters" and "the true Minutemen." Ya know, I feel calling terrorists "soldiers" (Dean) or "freedom fighers" (The Hamburgler) is like calling slave owners "states' rights advocates" or calling Nazis "Hebrew population coordinators." Pathetically, Kerry believes that the threat from terrorists has been "exaggerated," and this is a state of mindlessness which tips both his hand & that of his liberal comrades.
Now, I am not going to go back through Kerry's many flip-flops. Oh, bloody hell! Who am I kidding? I LOOOOOVE going back over them! In front of an Arab group, he called the Israeli wall a violation of international law & should be torn down. In front of a Jewish group, the wall, to Kerry, is a valid security measure. In front of union auto workers in Michigan, he bragged about his numerous gas-guzzling SUV's. In front of tree huggers on Earth Day, he claimed that the SUV's weren't actually his.........they belonged to his family. He voted FOR the 87 billion dollars to support our troops before he voted AGAINST it, this once Dean picked up steam in the primaries- keep in mind that a few weeks before that vote he had told Bob Schieffer that it would be reckless & irresponsible to vote against the bill, REGARDLESS of the reasoning. He told Tim Russert that we should spend however many billions it takes to win in Iraq. Now, we shouldn't have spent the money, money which could have gone to social programs- as if Bush hasn't spent enough. He says that he would withdraw troops from Iraq within 6 months. Then, 3 days later, said 4 years sounded better. And the list just goes on & on.
I know everyone has his or her favorite Kerry flip-flop or lie, but I find the most telling lie to be one which might surprise you guys: The tan-in-a-can lie. Instead of highlighting one of his major flip-flops or lies on a substantive issue, I find that the little lies give a far clearer window into a person's core psyche. He could have made a joke out of it. He could have told the media that he wanted to have some color for the debate cameras. He could have joked how it went badly and that he looked like a carrot. He could have made it into a self-deprecating joke, made them laugh, and garnered a bit of good will. However, he showed his true colors when he told a bold-faced lie by saying he got it from throwing around the football with students. Well, the problem is that the students commented to reporters that they were all taken aback by Kerry's orange appearance when he got off his bus. The Dems & the LMM love claiming that President Bush refuses to admit mistakes made in Iraq, but we all know how the vultures would treat a Bush admission: Kerry & the LMM would crucify him. However, when Kerry has the chance to come clean on such a small, irrelevant issue like a tan-in-a-can experiment gone bad, his first instinct is to lie & conceal. Just like he blamed the train conductor for not stopping to greet supporters; just like he blamed speech writers for the "Benedict Arnold" line that he used in over 25 speeches; just like he blamed the Secret Service agent for being the "son of a bitch" who tripped him; just like every other mistake he makes, Kerry either lies or blames the closest person to him. Gee, I wonder if Ashley Simpson got advice from Kerry before she blamed her band? Bottom Line: If this man can't be trusted to tell the truth about a fake tan, how could ANYONE trust ANYTHING that comes out of his mouth.
"Hi! I'm John Kerry. Whatever I say today is what I said in the past, regardless of what I said then.......well, unless, of course, I say something new tomorrow. In which case, whatever I said today or in the past is exactly what I will say tomorrow. Therefore, whatever I say tomorrow is what I am saying today! Why? Because I'm John Kerry, you lowly serf!"
{Side Note: Let's settle this seemingly conflicted strategy concerning whether or not to call Kerry a flip-flopper or a die-hard liberal. Ok, get ready to write.........:
JOHN KERRY IS A DIE-HARD LIBERAL FLIP-FLOPPER!
Ok? Got it? Here's the breakdown: He consistently votes as a radical liberal, but he, once in a blue moon, will vote in a mainstream manner, but ONLY when it will help him politically. However, this doesn't transform him from being a liberal. Eventually, he shows his true liberal nature when given enough time or changing polls. On that RARE occasion when he supports America, he flip flops on his earlier vote, claims he was lied to, then resorts back to his liberal ideology. Personally, I believe he isn't even a true flip-flopper. To flip flop, one simply changes sides once. The way kerry vacilates between positions, the REAL way I would describe Kerry would be to label him a pathologically-lying sociopath. However, despite the cries from the LMM, Kerry is BOTH a flip-flopper AND a liberal.}
Beyond his arrogance, even claiming that those poor, unwashed masses at the town hall debate obviously were serfs too dirty & dumb to make over $200,000- and Teresa was right around the corner to bash stay-at-home moms. Beyond the fact that he wants people to "pay their fair share," yet he & Edwards make sure to use every loophole in order to hold onto THEIR money- or Teresa's in Kerry's case. Beyond his inability to connect with the average American citizen. Beyond the fact that his current rhetoric completely belies his 20 year record as one of the most liberal members of the U.S. Senate. Beyond his numerous flip-flops, there is something far, FAR scarier: A President Ker....I can't even say it.
In light of Rehnquist's health problems, just imagine "Chief Justice Hillary Rodham Clinton!"
Now, I wish to get VERY serious.
Let's assume that the unprecedented, from-every-corner political assassination hit on President Bush works, a hit which makes it obvious that Nixon & Clinton both got off easy- no, I won't touch the obvious Slick Willy pun. If Kerry were to get in, he would make it his goal to ratify & justify his entire life, using Iraq as the victim. See, Kerry, like most liberals & members of the LMM, is a creature of the 60's, a "victim" of the Vietnam/Woodstock syndrome. If he could somehow turn Iraq into a true quagmire and have us suffer a humiliating defeat, it would vindicate his entire life. Just like when the swift boat beside him hit a mine, he will take off; John Kerry is the cut-and-run guy. Since he voted against the first Gulf War, this even though it had one of the largest coalitions ever and was funded mostly by other nations ( Remember how he claimed our military was a hired army?), we know that his global test is like everything else he puts forth: An empty batch of useless, politically-driven rhetoric. In additon to validating his Vietnam/Woodstock Syndrome mindset, a humiliating defeat in Iraq would, in his mind, destroy the Bush legacy and would kill, forever, the doctrine of preemption. Now that we, under a President Kerry, have been humiliated in Iraq and forced to leave Allawi's Iraq to the terrorist vultures, let's connect the dots as to what would follow:
Al Qaeda & other terrorists become emboldened & galvanized.
Prime Minister Allawi is assassinated, Zarqawi & Sadr split up Iraq, the Kurds declare independence, a three-way civil war ensues, and Iraq slips into an Islamic fundamentalist chaos.
North Korea breaks off all talks and continues to increase its nuclear arsenal.
Qaddafi, now on the road to becoming a semi-honest player on the world stage, will be overthrown by Hezbollah.
Karzai is either assassinated or forced into exile after the Taliban & Al Qaeda regroup & stage a coup.
Sudan falls into worse chaos & reverts completely back to being a terrorist haven.
Saudi Arabia, attempting to keep the corrupt royal family in power, cozy back up to Al Qaeda in the attempt to hang on to that power.
Israel, knowing that Kerry will only hold summits concerning Iran's impending position as a nuclear power, declares war on Iran & unleashes massive strikes on numerous sites in Iran, thus leading to a wide-ranging Arab/Jew Mid-East war.
Ok, are you ready for the motherfu*ker of all blowbacks?
Musharif, after being abandoned by Kerry, will be assassinated, and Pakistan's significant nuclear arsenal will become the new property of an Al Qaeda-supported regime.
At this point, we will be facing a world where 9/11 will sink into our national memory as the good old days.
Make no mistake, Iraq has become THE battleground in the War on Terror. We win, we deal a major blow to the terrorists, and a free & successful Afghanistan/Iraq version of the Mid-East will forever change the political landscape of that region & the world. This will ONLY happen if President Bush is re-elected. Kerry slips in & we lose? Well, build a bunker.
Yes, President Bush has made some mistakes. He has allowed spending to spiral out of control. He refuses to shut down the borders, perhaps putting a viable national Republican Party at risk within a decade. Plus, Paul O'Neill, Richard Clark, & George "Slamdunk" Tenet were big mistakes. Yes, he, like all Presidents, has made some mistakes, but this doesn't change the fact that he has become one of the greatest Commanders-in-Chief America has ever had. In addition to bringing us through the economic devastation of the Clinton recession, the stock bubble burst, corporate scandals, 9/11( 3,000 dead, 1 million jobs lost, & over a TRILLION dollars in damage), & two wars, he has proven that he has a vision for the world that will not only spread freedom & democracy, but one where America is made safer by destroying the terrorists & the regimes supporting them. Only by following the brilliant vision of President Bush, the true visionary of our time, do we stand a chance at short-circuiting a complete global Armageddon.
SPIKES
I don't know about you guys, but these are words which I NEVER wish to hear coming over the airwaves from the Oval Office. Thankfully, we are in a great position to make sure this stays just a nightmare. If we reelect President Bush, this horrible event has very little chance of ever coming to fruition. And unlike the liberal fearmongering about such ghosts as social security checks being taken away & the draft, this one would have a real possibility of arising under a Kerry admi...a..I can't even say it!
Not since the Reagan/Carter election have we been faced with such a stark difference in the choice of leader. Had Carter won in 1980, there is a very good chance that we would have seen a Soviet Union determined to hang on, if not launch an attack which would have led to a nuclear holocaust. Only due to Reagan's clear vision of good & evil and his military buildup did we avert such an unprecedented disaster. Now, we are in a very similar position. President Bush, upon paying for the sins of neglect made by Bill Clinton, has prosecuted the War on Terror in a manner which has not only kept us safe since that fateful day in September, but he has liberated 50 million people, two nations, and has the terrorists hiding & fighting for their sheer survival- most of the Taliban & two-thirds of Al Qaeda have been killed or captured, and bin Laden is either dead or ordering Domino's pizza from a cave address. Anyone who thinks that Kerry would not reverse course in a disastrous manner must be pissing a LOT of "Koolade."
Over the years, Kerry has shown time & again that he is a creature of the 60's, inexorably controlled by the Vietnam/Woodstock Syndrome. He believes that the military is evil. Yes, I said it....EVIL! He called his fellow soldiers in Nam war criminals (What? You hadn't heard that he spent 129 days in Vietnam?), though now he claims that he was talking about Nixon & the politicians. I'm sorry, how could Nixon have committed the crimes Kerry enumerated? You remember, right?
(In a very thick, over-the-top, goofy Boston accent)
"The pulling on ears, the tweaking of noses, the poking of eyes in a fashion reminiscent of the Three Stooges."
Yeah, now you remember. Strange when discussing the Abu Ghraib incident he not only damned the soldiers, but he also made damn sure to say that the culpability went "all the way to the top." Gee, that sounds very familiar. That's right, that came straight from his '71 testimony- or as I say, treason. See, this man has not changed a bit from his hippie days. He still believes the military is an instrument of evil. He still believes that the President- Bush, in this case- enjoys waging war for the sake of waging war. He still believes that America is a corrupt bully, spreading its flawed ideology of freedom & democracy by use of force. He still believes that the U.N. & the international community are the righteous balance to that corrupt American imperialistic proclivity. Also, sadly, he refuses to believe in good & evil, though I have a feeling that Kerry would describe America as the latter.
President Bush, on the other hand, believes in the innate goodness of America. Yes, we have had our dark moments over the last 200 or so years, but now, today, we are the force for good that fights the evil in this increasingly lethal world. President Bush believes that the intrinsic order of the human spirit is the desire to be free & to live in peace. John Kerry & his fellow liberals will tell you that it is not our right to force freedom upon other peoples. I tell you it is not THEIR right to stand in our way when we attempt to give the downtrodden at least the choice. If you believe that the natural order of the human spirit is to be free, then you must side with President Bush: The true visionary of our time.
Now, let me make the case that many Republicans in office are too scared to make. While the reason for the war against the Taliban & Al Qaeda in Afghanistan is self-evident- unless you are a Hamburgler liberal- the case for Iraq is more subtle and yet so simple, though very controversial to American defeatists & haters. The war in Iraq was never totally about WMD's, never totally about Saddam, and never really about freeing the Iraqi people, though that is icing on the cake and a victory for the human spirit. No, the war in Iraq is about position & influence. When President Bush declared war on terror after 9/11, it was inevitable that we, in order to win, had to change the face of the Middle East. Now, we have freed Afghanistan, we have freed Iraq, Libya has capitulated, Sudan is flipping toward us, Saudi Arabia has been put on high alert concerning its links to terrorism, and Musharif's Pakistan has become a strong ally in this apocalyptic battle. Iran, one of the two remaining members of the Axis of Evil, is hell-bent on becoming a nuclear power, one which openly supports & funds terrorism. Well, my friends, it's an all new ball game now that we have moved into the neighborhood. We have Iran sandwiched between Afghanistan & Iraq, putting us in a perfect geographical location from where we can either monitor its evil actions or, Joss forbid, attack it in the event the regime becomes too provocative in its actions. Every breath they take they must worry about having been infiltrated- as they have done to us in Iraq. They now must worry that we can monitor their every move. They must now concern themselves that we could be in Tehran airspace before they can say, "The Great Satan must die."
See, it's very obvious. The majority of Iranians hate the mullah-led regime and are waiting for its inevitable fall. The more pressure we can mount against Iran, the greater the likelihood that the regime will falter more quickly and that the Iranian people will rise up. Beyond that, we will be able to short-circuit a full-on assault on Iran by Israel. Face it, even if we had never gone into Iraq, an Israeli/Iranian war would have drawn us into that region, ANYWAY! Since this, what with Iran's race for long-range missiles & nukes, is still a possibility, doesn't it make more sense to have the best geographical position and to have changed as many Mid-East regimes into allies? Once Iran falls, Syria will become so isolated that it will wither on the vine.
A liberal like Clinton or Kerry, upon being attacked on 9/11, would have no doubt responded. However, they would have only made cosmetic, surgical missile strikes upon certain locations, claimed they got the bad guys, and called it a day. Basically, they would have killed a couple hornets but would have happily left the festering nest, praying we don't get stung again. Well, President Bush has decided that the only way to protect ourselves is to get out the Raid & kill the entire nest. Sure, a few will get away, but they will no longer have a nest from which to train & base. The terrorists have already lost numerous regimes that supported & accomodated them......and the news only gets worse for them. Sure, they can hole up in Fallujah for a while, but only to catch their breath. Also, there will never come a day when Karzai or Allawi or Musharif- or it seems Qaddafi, now- will hand over WMD's to these murderous thugs, assuming Bush's vision of a new Mid-East comes to fruition. Yes, there are a lot of problems which have, can, & will occur, but the only other choice is to elect Kerry, retreat, hide under a rug, and pray these thugs lose our address.
Oh, in addition to 9/11, let's not forget another one of Clinton's legacies: North Korea. Yes, let's have bilateral talks with Kim Jong Il & his lackeys, agree to let them have a "peaceful" nuclear program, give aid, declare victory, and walk away. Gee, that went well. OOPS! Wait, now they have nukes. I guess Kim Jong Il & his goons WEREN'T the good ole boys Clinton & his administration thought they were, huh? Oh, I forgot, they "tricked us," or so Madeleine Albright proclaimed. Seems things have gotten so bad you can't even trust a brutal dictator! Actually, it seems that the French & the U.N. can't be trusted, either. Still, Kerry would solve all of that with a global test, a test where only America & freedom fail to make the grade. But don't you worry because Kerry has a "plan" for everything........just don't ask for details.
Kerry has voted against nearly every weapons program we use. He was in favor of what would have resulted in a unilateral nuclear freeze during the Cold War. He sided with communists like Ortega, this even though Ortega, after Kerry & his fellow liberals defended Ortega against the communist charge made by Republicans, flew to Moscow for a reward of millions of filthy commie dollars- gee, I guess Kerry got "tricked." He praises France & the corrupt Useless Nations, yet demeans our TRUE allies, even going so far as to call them "bribed" & "coerced"- this though it turns out that the U.N., France & others were REALLY the "bribed." He calls PM Allawi a puppet and refuses to acknowledge the contribution made by the thousands of Iraqi police & soldiers, many of whom have given their lives for their country. Kerry believes the War on Terror is more of an intelligence & law enforcement issue. Well, even after the first WTC attack in 1993 he proposed a 6.5 billion dollar cut in intelligence, and he has vowed to gut the Patriot Act. Gee, I guess that WOULD leave us with "spitballs."
Just like the spokesperson for Kerry's party, The Hamburgler, Kerry believes that there is no real terrorist threat, though not going as far as Moore, calling the terrorists "freedom fighters" and "the true Minutemen." Ya know, I feel calling terrorists "soldiers" (Dean) or "freedom fighers" (The Hamburgler) is like calling slave owners "states' rights advocates" or calling Nazis "Hebrew population coordinators." Pathetically, Kerry believes that the threat from terrorists has been "exaggerated," and this is a state of mindlessness which tips both his hand & that of his liberal comrades.
Now, I am not going to go back through Kerry's many flip-flops. Oh, bloody hell! Who am I kidding? I LOOOOOVE going back over them! In front of an Arab group, he called the Israeli wall a violation of international law & should be torn down. In front of a Jewish group, the wall, to Kerry, is a valid security measure. In front of union auto workers in Michigan, he bragged about his numerous gas-guzzling SUV's. In front of tree huggers on Earth Day, he claimed that the SUV's weren't actually his.........they belonged to his family. He voted FOR the 87 billion dollars to support our troops before he voted AGAINST it, this once Dean picked up steam in the primaries- keep in mind that a few weeks before that vote he had told Bob Schieffer that it would be reckless & irresponsible to vote against the bill, REGARDLESS of the reasoning. He told Tim Russert that we should spend however many billions it takes to win in Iraq. Now, we shouldn't have spent the money, money which could have gone to social programs- as if Bush hasn't spent enough. He says that he would withdraw troops from Iraq within 6 months. Then, 3 days later, said 4 years sounded better. And the list just goes on & on.
I know everyone has his or her favorite Kerry flip-flop or lie, but I find the most telling lie to be one which might surprise you guys: The tan-in-a-can lie. Instead of highlighting one of his major flip-flops or lies on a substantive issue, I find that the little lies give a far clearer window into a person's core psyche. He could have made a joke out of it. He could have told the media that he wanted to have some color for the debate cameras. He could have joked how it went badly and that he looked like a carrot. He could have made it into a self-deprecating joke, made them laugh, and garnered a bit of good will. However, he showed his true colors when he told a bold-faced lie by saying he got it from throwing around the football with students. Well, the problem is that the students commented to reporters that they were all taken aback by Kerry's orange appearance when he got off his bus. The Dems & the LMM love claiming that President Bush refuses to admit mistakes made in Iraq, but we all know how the vultures would treat a Bush admission: Kerry & the LMM would crucify him. However, when Kerry has the chance to come clean on such a small, irrelevant issue like a tan-in-a-can experiment gone bad, his first instinct is to lie & conceal. Just like he blamed the train conductor for not stopping to greet supporters; just like he blamed speech writers for the "Benedict Arnold" line that he used in over 25 speeches; just like he blamed the Secret Service agent for being the "son of a bitch" who tripped him; just like every other mistake he makes, Kerry either lies or blames the closest person to him. Gee, I wonder if Ashley Simpson got advice from Kerry before she blamed her band? Bottom Line: If this man can't be trusted to tell the truth about a fake tan, how could ANYONE trust ANYTHING that comes out of his mouth.
"Hi! I'm John Kerry. Whatever I say today is what I said in the past, regardless of what I said then.......well, unless, of course, I say something new tomorrow. In which case, whatever I said today or in the past is exactly what I will say tomorrow. Therefore, whatever I say tomorrow is what I am saying today! Why? Because I'm John Kerry, you lowly serf!"
{Side Note: Let's settle this seemingly conflicted strategy concerning whether or not to call Kerry a flip-flopper or a die-hard liberal. Ok, get ready to write.........:
JOHN KERRY IS A DIE-HARD LIBERAL FLIP-FLOPPER!
Ok? Got it? Here's the breakdown: He consistently votes as a radical liberal, but he, once in a blue moon, will vote in a mainstream manner, but ONLY when it will help him politically. However, this doesn't transform him from being a liberal. Eventually, he shows his true liberal nature when given enough time or changing polls. On that RARE occasion when he supports America, he flip flops on his earlier vote, claims he was lied to, then resorts back to his liberal ideology. Personally, I believe he isn't even a true flip-flopper. To flip flop, one simply changes sides once. The way kerry vacilates between positions, the REAL way I would describe Kerry would be to label him a pathologically-lying sociopath. However, despite the cries from the LMM, Kerry is BOTH a flip-flopper AND a liberal.}
Beyond his arrogance, even claiming that those poor, unwashed masses at the town hall debate obviously were serfs too dirty & dumb to make over $200,000- and Teresa was right around the corner to bash stay-at-home moms. Beyond the fact that he wants people to "pay their fair share," yet he & Edwards make sure to use every loophole in order to hold onto THEIR money- or Teresa's in Kerry's case. Beyond his inability to connect with the average American citizen. Beyond the fact that his current rhetoric completely belies his 20 year record as one of the most liberal members of the U.S. Senate. Beyond his numerous flip-flops, there is something far, FAR scarier: A President Ker....I can't even say it.
In light of Rehnquist's health problems, just imagine "Chief Justice Hillary Rodham Clinton!"
Now, I wish to get VERY serious.
Let's assume that the unprecedented, from-every-corner political assassination hit on President Bush works, a hit which makes it obvious that Nixon & Clinton both got off easy- no, I won't touch the obvious Slick Willy pun. If Kerry were to get in, he would make it his goal to ratify & justify his entire life, using Iraq as the victim. See, Kerry, like most liberals & members of the LMM, is a creature of the 60's, a "victim" of the Vietnam/Woodstock syndrome. If he could somehow turn Iraq into a true quagmire and have us suffer a humiliating defeat, it would vindicate his entire life. Just like when the swift boat beside him hit a mine, he will take off; John Kerry is the cut-and-run guy. Since he voted against the first Gulf War, this even though it had one of the largest coalitions ever and was funded mostly by other nations ( Remember how he claimed our military was a hired army?), we know that his global test is like everything else he puts forth: An empty batch of useless, politically-driven rhetoric. In additon to validating his Vietnam/Woodstock Syndrome mindset, a humiliating defeat in Iraq would, in his mind, destroy the Bush legacy and would kill, forever, the doctrine of preemption. Now that we, under a President Kerry, have been humiliated in Iraq and forced to leave Allawi's Iraq to the terrorist vultures, let's connect the dots as to what would follow:
Al Qaeda & other terrorists become emboldened & galvanized.
Prime Minister Allawi is assassinated, Zarqawi & Sadr split up Iraq, the Kurds declare independence, a three-way civil war ensues, and Iraq slips into an Islamic fundamentalist chaos.
North Korea breaks off all talks and continues to increase its nuclear arsenal.
Qaddafi, now on the road to becoming a semi-honest player on the world stage, will be overthrown by Hezbollah.
Karzai is either assassinated or forced into exile after the Taliban & Al Qaeda regroup & stage a coup.
Sudan falls into worse chaos & reverts completely back to being a terrorist haven.
Saudi Arabia, attempting to keep the corrupt royal family in power, cozy back up to Al Qaeda in the attempt to hang on to that power.
Israel, knowing that Kerry will only hold summits concerning Iran's impending position as a nuclear power, declares war on Iran & unleashes massive strikes on numerous sites in Iran, thus leading to a wide-ranging Arab/Jew Mid-East war.
Ok, are you ready for the motherfu*ker of all blowbacks?
Musharif, after being abandoned by Kerry, will be assassinated, and Pakistan's significant nuclear arsenal will become the new property of an Al Qaeda-supported regime.
At this point, we will be facing a world where 9/11 will sink into our national memory as the good old days.
Make no mistake, Iraq has become THE battleground in the War on Terror. We win, we deal a major blow to the terrorists, and a free & successful Afghanistan/Iraq version of the Mid-East will forever change the political landscape of that region & the world. This will ONLY happen if President Bush is re-elected. Kerry slips in & we lose? Well, build a bunker.
Yes, President Bush has made some mistakes. He has allowed spending to spiral out of control. He refuses to shut down the borders, perhaps putting a viable national Republican Party at risk within a decade. Plus, Paul O'Neill, Richard Clark, & George "Slamdunk" Tenet were big mistakes. Yes, he, like all Presidents, has made some mistakes, but this doesn't change the fact that he has become one of the greatest Commanders-in-Chief America has ever had. In addition to bringing us through the economic devastation of the Clinton recession, the stock bubble burst, corporate scandals, 9/11( 3,000 dead, 1 million jobs lost, & over a TRILLION dollars in damage), & two wars, he has proven that he has a vision for the world that will not only spread freedom & democracy, but one where America is made safer by destroying the terrorists & the regimes supporting them. Only by following the brilliant vision of President Bush, the true visionary of our time, do we stand a chance at short-circuiting a complete global Armageddon.
SPIKES
Can I re-post this in another forum (without claiming I wrote it, naturally)?
:blah2: :blah2:
