Bush Is The President. And Will Still Be The President on November 3, 2004.

President Bush made his point very clearly. He prefers to fight TERRORISTS on their shores, rather than on the soil of America.

I don’t know which debate most of the media saw last night (September 30, 2004), because according to them, Senator John Kerry won a huge victory and looked downright Presidential.

What I saw was a guy who made no shortage of accusations, and kept on telling the millions of viewers and listeners that he had a plan. What plan? John Lehrer of PBS Television, the debate moderator, asked Kerry about the plan.

Kerry’s answer was succinct. Check my Web Site. So I did. And I still have no idea what his plan is.

I know nothing more about what Kerry will do to protect America (and the world) today, than I knew before the debate. All I saw in Kerry was a guy who spoke well and danced like Fred Astair.

To the Kerry supporters, it seems that he scored a huge victory just by not screwing up. But to me, that’s no victory.

Kerry kept on insisting the USA should have UNILATERAL talks with North Korea over nuclear proliferation, but should have MULTILATERAL talks over Iraq and America’s fight against TERRORISM. How does he square that circle?

In the meantime, Kerry conveniently forgot that his two heros, Clinton and Carter had unilateral talks with North Korea over proliferation that ended in disaster.

Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter was Clinton’s chief non proliferation negotiator with North Korea, when they both thought they had won an agreement with the nutsy leader of the failed Communist state.

Carter was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for this “incredible” achievement. Unfortunately though, just days before Carter was to receive the award and the accompanying cash, North Korea announced that it lied to Carter and Clinton, and indeed had nuclear weapons.

Even after the deception was proudly revealed by North Korea, the Nobel Committee still gave Carter the Peace Prize. Why should anyone be surprised, since they gave Arafat the Nobel Peace Prize as well?

The commonality between these two, is that both of these characters received an award and accolade neither deserved.

And even after this monumental failure of bilateral negotiations between North Korea and the USA, this is still where Kerry wants to once again lead America and the world. Somehow all of this was lost on the media.

Kerry kept on talking about multilateralism, as if getting the approbation of the UN, France, and Germany is what ails American foreign policy. He and the media seem to forget that France, Germany and the UN cheated on the embargo that was supposed to choke Saddam and give relief to the Iraqi people.

While America was playing by the UN, French and German rules, these three (with Russia) were busy making BILLIONS of dollars by violating their own resolutions, which did nothing to help the hungry Iraqi children, but rather empowered and enriched Saddam Hussein.

Kerry kept on insisting that the fight against Saddam Hussein took away from the fight against Al Qaeda and the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. Does Kerry think so little of the US military, that he can’t see them doing two things well at the same time?

And how exactly does he want the Americans to find a man who’s probably holed-up in Pakistan, a country the American military is not permitted to enter?

And somehow, everyone in the media seemed to forget what President Bush repeated over and over again, that the USA has some 30 countries which have allied themselves as a willing coalition.

Why does Kerry believe that only France can give this coalition legitimacy?

Kerry kept on insisting that America is no safer today than it was during the time of 9/11.


Someone should remind the Senator from Massachusetts that since 9/11, there has not been one attack against America, at home or abroad (not including war zones).

President Bush made his point very clearly. He prefers to fight TERRORISTS on their shores, rather than on the soil of America.

President Bush could have also pointed out that even though slightly more than 1,000 American soldiers have died fighting the TERRORISTS in Iraq; that number is only about one third of the Americans who died on 9/11, simply because Democrats like Clinton and Carter would not rise to the TERRORIST and Islamist threats and attacks when they had the chance.

No one needs to think hard about what happened under the abysmal leadership of President Jimmy Carter.

Under Clinton: there was the first attack at the World Trade Centre (1993), the killing of American soldiers in Somalia (1993), the bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia (1996), the two US Embassy bombings in East Africa (Tanzania and Kenya 1998), and the destruction of the USS Cole in Yemen waters (2000).

Clinton’s response to all of this was to lob a Cruise Missile into a tent in the Sudan. And Kerry wants to bring the Carter and Clinton teams back into the White House.


In pre-debate negotiations, the television networks all agreed not to show cutaways of either candidate. This meant that the camera was to be focused only on the candidate speaking, without showing the other candidate’s visible reaction to what was said.

But unbeknownst to Bush (and I assume to Kerry as well), the networks reneged on their word, and showed Bush in deep thought, or scribbling notes while Kerry was speaking.

I guess the media thinks it’s good journalism to promise not to do something, and then break that promise by catching the President off-guard in moments of reflection.


President Bush stayed the course. He defended his actions. He told the American people that he will do the same after the November election as he is doing now. He made his case for America to defend democracy, and to spread freedom in the Arab world. And he did it convincingly.

If you ask me where the President stands on any issue concerning national security and foreign affairs? I can answer that question without doubt.

If on the other hand, you were to ask me where Kerry stands on the same issues? All I can say is that he has a plan. I just don’t know what it is.

All this debate convinced me of; was that America and the world will be better off with 4 more years of Bush, in spite of all the anti-Bush media hype. Kerry’s not the guy.

Recommended Non-Restrictive
Free Speech Social Media:
Share This Editorial

One Comment

  1. Tf you bring any financial assets to the south, do NOT bring anything to California, otherwise they will be swallowed up in taxes!

Comments are closed.