Kerry has been seeking the presidency since he was a teenager.
The lifelong ambition has
caused him to do, or say anything, expedient
to reach his goal. That's why
there are so many inconsistencies in his past.
The only things I can ascertain that Kerry truly
stands for is entitlement programs, associated spending,
and increased taxes for the so-called rich. So, the
net effect of a Kerry presidency, imo, would not be
a better economic position for the US.
More importantly, Kerry's stance as a benevolent
internationalist, imo at least, weakens us and
plays into the hands of terrorists and other enemies.
How do you think the North Vietnamese defeated us?
Just as they said they would, in our streets here.
Kerry is an active participant in bringing about
the same result in Iraq and elsewhere in the world
(just like he did in the '70's ironically).
He wants to apologize to terrorists and other
countries and "bring us back" into the world community.
uh huh.
Look at how terrorists believe they affected the
elections in Spain, and what happened thereafter?
Who won that round?
And are the Spanish foolish enough to think that
now they'll be "spared" by the terrorists?
It's like a giant Stockholm Syndrome.
But guess what, we're not dealing with rational
people, we're dealing with people who have sworn
blood oaths and absolutely do not care who they
kill, while we try to behave in as humane a way
as possible. Were that not so, Fallujah would have
been levelled 2 weeks ago.
So, to bottom line it, I don't think Kerry is
the man to protect and lead us in these changed
times. His position today is his 1970's position
warmed over. And I am sure our enemies, as well as
all those "foreign leaders" who support him, are
laughing up their sleeves and gleefully rooting
for a Kerry win. |
