posted October 14, 2004 06:42 PM            

As we select the man who will lead America, then, we have to put above all else the question of the character and guiding principles of this individual, George W. Bush or John Kerry. We can't possibly know what they will face, but we have to be able to know that they will make the right decisions because of where their principles and character lead them.

For this reason it is difficult to imagine why so many Americans are willing to trust the presidency to John Kerry. With national security of paramount concern at this time of war and threat of terror, it is abundantly clear that Kerry has been on the wrong side of history regarding these issues.

In the 1960s and 1970s he was against the very war that he fought in. Moreover, he did not believe, as he told the Senate committee after he returned from Vietnam, that we could fight communism all over the world.

John Kerry was wrong.

In the 1980s, Kerry was against the Reagan plan to win the Cold War and resign the Soviet Union to the "ash heap of history." Kerry instead supported the Soviet-backed nuclear freeze, urged detente with the Soviets, opposed putting weapons in Europe and the development of missile defense.

John Kerry was wrong.

Also in the 1980s, Kerry was against fighting communist expansion right here in the Americas. He opposed President Reagan kicking the Cubans out of Grenada. He opposed supporting the freedom fighters in Nicaragua and El Salvador, and instead went to visit communist leader Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and shook his hand.

John Kerry was wrong.

In the 1990s, Kerry was against Operation Desert Storm to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait, despite the fact that the entire world was behind the use of force. More than 100 nations backed the U.S.-led effort against Saddam, but Kerry voted NO on the floor of the Senate. If he cannot support that "global test," there is no test that would ever pass if he were ever commander in chief.

John Kerry was wrong. If he had his way, not only would Saddam Hussein still be in Iraq, he would still be in Kuwait and quite possibly in Saudi Arabia.

Now in this decade we are at war in Iraq and with terrorists worldwide. Kerry, when asked if Saddam would still be in power in Iraq as he flip-flops on his support for the war, said in the second debate, "Maybe, maybe not." This is not the strong, principled leader that America needs in these times of great challenge and indeed of great danger.

Many have asserted the Kerry is a flip-flopper; that he will say whatever he has to say to get elected. To some degree they are correct. But there is more consistency than meets the eye.

Kerry really is a man who does not believe America should be strong and stand up to our enemies, be they in Southeast Asia or the Soviet Union or Latin America or the Middle East. He is a pacifist who believes that evil can be seduced, or treated as criminal activity.

It is interesting to hear Kerry talk glowingly about the foreign policies of JFK and Ronald Reagan. But Kerry was on the opposite side of these two presidents that he now pretends to emulate. He even called the Reagan presidency "the era of moral darkness" in an interview with the Boston Globe in 1989.

posted October 14, 2004 08:10 PM            

No wonder the Kerry Campaign has NO COMMENT.

Kerry Evades Questions About Ties to Terrorist Iran
Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004

WASHINGTON – Sen. John Kerry’s campaign Thursday was accused of avoiding sticky questions about Iranian influence on his presidential bid.

"Do I think they're running out the clock until after the election? Absolutely I do," responded Bob Jenevein, attorney for a top figure in the Student Movement Coordinating Committee for Democracy in Iran (SMCCDI).
Story Continues Below

In answer to a question from NewsMax.com, Jenevein said the Kerry-Edwards campaign was stalling on signing any deposition acknowledging that Hassan Nemazee, a New York investment banker, had "provided the campaign with advice and/or insight on matters relevant to Iran and U.S.-Iran relations." Nemazee is listed as a member of the board of American-Iranian Council, which SMCCDI says favors "eventually normalization of relations with Iran," a state sponsor of terrorism.

The attorney said Kerry’s campaign told him that even though he had sought since July to put the Democrat nominee’s foreign policy adviser Rand Beers under oath about Nemazee's relation to the campaign for the White House, Beers would not be available until Nov. 10, 8 days after the election. "That is unacceptable," Jenovein told NewsMax. SMCCDI has alleged Nemazee has used his position to advance the interests of Iran’s Islamic regime. Jenevein represents SMCCDI Coordinator Aryo Pirouznia. Nemaze had filed a $10 million suit against Pirouznia charging defamation of character and denying that he has served as an agent for the Iranian government. Pirouznia has counter-sued, and his attorney's effort to put Kerry’s campaign under oath is a part of that legal battle. Nemazee himself has been scheduled to provide a deposition on Monday in New York.

NewsMax has attempted without success to elicit comment from Kerry’s campaign on this. We were put in touch with an assistant to Beers, Greta Lundeberg, who refused comment and referred NewsMax to the campaign's press office. That phone went unanswered. A "fact sheet" issued by Jenevein cited reports from the mainstream media and from Kerry’s campaign itself that Nemazee had raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the senator's race.

John Corsi, who co-wrote the best seller "Unfit for Command," which contradicts many of Kerry's claims about his stint in Vietnam, reiterated at today's news conference that Kerry’s campaign had been backed by pro-mullah groups that are funding terrorists attacking U.S. troops in Iraq.

SMCCDI has cited Kerry's comment in the first debate with President Bush, where the candidate made the following statement regarding Tehran and nuclear weapons: "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide [Iran with] nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together."

Corsi compared that to handing a 5-year-old child a stick of dynamite to “see what happens." Or, he added, perhaps something similar to the mistake the U.S. made in the 1930s in selling scrap metal to the Japanese, only to have them shoot it back at us at Pearl Harbor.

In his most recent letter to Beers and Lundeberg of the Kerry campaign, attorney Jenevein urged them to "confirm under oath what you have already confirmed on the record with a reporter." The reporter in question was investigative journalist Ken Timmerman, who was also at the news conference at the National Press Club.

Timmerman said he had warned Nemazee against joining the board of American Iranian Council, telling him that freedom-loving Iranians would regard him "as a traitor" to their struggle. SMCCDI’s "fact sheet" notes that Nemazee nonetheless is on the council’s board.

posted October 16, 2004 06:08 PM              

Certainly not that nervous, teeth clenching, ready to explode, rapid eye blinking, psudeo president that I saw on the debates....*sigh*

My god...look at where he's taken us so far????

No...certainly not george w bush...(or maybe I should say cheney, since he's the "man behind the curtain" throwing his voice to the puppet)....eeeeee I'm gonna ruffle some feathers, here....

posted October 16, 2004 07:45 PM            

Not the man who voted against every piece of military hardware in our arsenal. The man who attempted to hand Europe over to the Soviet Union by placing us at a military disadvantage there. The man who voted to strip the intelligence budgets AFTER it was clear America was being attacked by terrorists around the world.

Not the man who carried the American flag upside down, the man who sewed Viet Cong and Communist North Vietnam military insignia on American military uniforms.

And most certainly not the man who said American military forces should never be deployed anywhere in the world unless they were under the command and control of UN commanders

Oh yeah, not to forget the man who says America's security measures must pass the Global test. Hello, the man is a total idiot. Not fit to be an American, let along President of the United States.

John Kerry doesn't have the right stuff for America. Perhaps Kerry should immigrate to France, the land of the surrender artists.

posted October 17, 2004 01:03 AM              

"There...there..."

Let's shake hands like Bush and Kerry do..(isn't that quite the show, tho?)

posted October 17, 2004 03:18 AM              

QUOTE:

Who among us would have thought as we elected a president in 2000 that American soil would be attacked, thousands killed, and our country thrust into war?

That statement is wrong. We did not elect Bush as President. He was appointed to the office.

The rest of it is wrong too and the opinion of yellow journalists from Newsmax who NEVER offer both sides of things but instead are biased and partisan thereby proving they don't even believe in democracy because they sure don't promote it.

posted October 17, 2004 11:06 AM            

Because you continue supporting and spreading the lie, one must come to the conclusion you have an aversion for the truth.