Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : John Kerry for President? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (2480)	10/19/2004 11:44:58 AM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3515

Are We Stupid Enough To Elect John Kerry? By David Allen Jared Oct. 19, 2004 Someone once said, "You'll never get rich by underestimating the stupidity of the American voter." In some respects, this might even be a true statement--especially if one considers late polling going on THIS year (and actually believes what the polls are ostensibly saying.) We have an incumbent President who, though with some flaws, has led the nation through some VERY tough times and made some very tough decisions in our names--most of which are proving out as time goes on. On the other side, we have Senator John Kerry with virtually NO record of achievement over a 20-year career in Washington and, to a dead-bang certainty refused to keep faith with his fellow veterans and even betrayed them by accusing them, at least by implication, of being war criminals. He then had the temerity to insist that HIS was the only morally-defensible position with regard to Vietnam--essentially abandoning a valuable cold war ally to subjugation by a vicious, communist regime that has committed untold atrocities against these same people. Yet, his candidacy remains viable in spite of all this. Are we REALLY stupid? Well, we DID elect another anti-war leftist to the presidency twice during the 1990's after all. Thankfully, we also had the good sense to checkmate his plans for us by installing conservative majorities in both houses of Congress for much of his tenure, so maybe it's a net wash. President Bush lead a military force in Iraq that is so good, so efficient, that it took them less time to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took for Teddy Kennedy to report that his car had gone off that bridge at Chappaquiddick 'way back when. We've been searching for WMD's in Iraq, an essentially- desert country roughly the size of California, for less time than it took Hillary to find those missing Rose Law Firm billing records and all she had to search was her own quarters in the White House! Yet, some people have concluded that there really WERE "no WMD's" in Iraq-- despite every intel service in the world believing the opposite. We've been treated to "investigations" and "reports" by a variety of committees, commissions and other investigative bodies for the past few months INSISTING that Saddam did NOT have a WMD program after his defeat in 1991--despite evidence to the contrary. Some "testimony" by disgruntled, ex-weapons inspectors (who were put out of a job by the Iraq invasion in March of 2003) suggests that THEY (and ONLY they) know the truth of the matter. The facts belie that assertion and new evidence reveals that our "allies" in the UN and elsewhere have been playing fast and loose with the weapons embargoes almost from the day they were imposed. We keep finding weapons caches, some of which have manufacture dates AFTER the end of the 1991 Gulf War, from France, China and even Russia. Just yesterday, a HUGE such cache was found in a house near Salman Pak, that infamous terrorist training camp outside of Baghdad where Mohammed Atta is reputed to have received training in plane hijacking. ALL those weapons were of Russian and Chinese manufacture. Yet, despite all this, we STILL have tens of thousands of Americans who believe what Kerry and Co. are feeding them about Iraq NOT being a legitimate target in the war on terrorism. Is that stupidity, or simple hubris? Only time will tell for sure, but the mere fact that John Kerry and John Edwards are considered "in the running" for election in two more weeks, indicates that there are vast numbers of Americans who can't see past their own noses and who will buy almost ANYTHING they are force-fed by the so-called "mainstream media." Bush is being portrayed by these folks as the personification of evil and stupidity. They even have resorted to citing the foreign press corps which has enthusiastically endorsed Kerry and insists that Bush is "dangerous." He's dangerous, all right, but only to those who seek to do us harm and who don't have the decency to admit it--like the French government, for example. The danger to THEM is that they are in danger of becoming even MORE irrelevant on the world's stage, and Bush's steady hand is largely responsible. No wonder, they dislike and fear him. That's a GOOD thing, in my estimation. In about two weeks, we'll elect another President of the United States. It'll either be another four years of President Bush or four years of Kerry/Edwards. If it turns out that we're dumb enough to install the Democrat's ticket in the White House, we'll probably deserve what we get--four years of wishy-washy, bow-down-to-the-UN foreign policy and massive tax increases domestically, a rapidly failing health care system and the further erosion of our kids' educations in the name of PC and historical revisionism. If we DO elect these guys (and I don't believe that we will), we'll deserve the disgrace that election will slap us with. Maybe that's the very definition of "stupidity."