|
|||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
By Rachel Marsden | Bio It
must be damn Depressing to be a liberal nowadays. All that talk about how crummy
the world is, and no motivation to do anything except complain about it--or in
John Kerry’s case, talk about holding a summit about it. I’m sure the
terrorists would really dig those summits. They could listen to Kerry tell them
about his plan to “fight the war on terrorism” with “every soldier sitting
home at the dinner table”. It’s precisely this kind of bamboozling that
makes John Kerry unfit to be the Leader of the Free World.
Cut
through the flowery rhetoric and spin, and the Kerry ‘plan’ is little more
than a maxed-out gong show. To illustrate, here’s a very brief summary of all
three Presidential debates, as seen by me: Bush:
Saddam Hussein is gone and the world is better off without him. Kerry: I have a
dream...er, plan for Iraq. The ‘dream’ line was already taken by that black
civil rights guy, unfortunately. Hey speaking of blacks, you haven’t met with
the Black Congressional caucus yet! Bush:
Um, yes I have, actually. Kerry.
Whatever. Plan. Plan. Plan. Halliburton. Oh that reminds me, your lumber company
made 84 bucks! Hah! Bush:
We need to improve health care through tort reform and cost-reduction pooling. Kerry:
Screw that. I’m going to raid Canada’s medicine cabinet for cheap drugs!
(Note: This would likely be Kerry’s first unilateral action to have failed his
‘global test’, since Canadian pharmacies have already rejected bulk drug
purchases from the USA for fear that to do otherwise would adversely affect
supply.) Bush:
I don’t know if sexual orientation is a choice, but I believe in treating
people with tolerance, respect and dignity. Kerry:
Whatever. Mary Cheney is a lesbian. Bush:
You’re so LIBERAL that you make Ted Kennedy look conservative. Kerry:
Shhhhhhh! You used the ‘L’ word! Focus groups didn’t like that word. Cut
it out with the labeling, okay? Say, isn’t Mary Cheney gay? Bush:
I think it’s important to promote a culture of life. Kerry:
Shut up. Er, I mean, I respect that. Did I mention that I’m Catholic? I have a
plan. Bush:
You voted to increase taxes 98 times, while my record favors tax cuts to put
more money in people’s pockets. Kerry:
I won’t raise taxes. I promise. I’ll just nickel-and-dime you all to death
with user fees, and roll back Bush’s tax cuts. I hope you’re all too stupid
to realize what I’m really trying to pull off here, because my campaign
depends on you falling for stuff like this. Adv:
What
does the government know about you? The
contrast between Bush and Kerry, as well as conservatives and liberals, is no
sharper than in the area of foreign policy. On one of my recent radio shows, I
was talking about how Afghanistan had just hosted its first free elections, and
how great it was that the people there finally had control over their
government. Under the Taliban rule, torture, executions and massacres were
commonplace, and women lived under a constant state of threat and oppression.
Now, women in Afghanistan are running for that country’s highest office. All
of this represents a blow to oppression, and a huge victory for freedom,
democracy and long-term stability. But one of my listeners didn’t see it that
way. As far as he was concerned, the Afghan elections were rigged, and the whole
thing was a joke. This listener, like John Kerry during the first Presidential
debate, complained that the country was still producing opium, and then he went
on to lecture me on opium production numbers—right down to the kilogram. Leave
it to liberals to know zip-all about politics beyond the usual talking-points,
but everything about drug production. Complaints
about the Afghan elections, valid or not, would have materialized in any case.
There’s always room for improvement. Look at Florida. Any reasonable human
being would recognize that not having average citizens living in fear of their
government stringing them up by their fingernails is a good start, but liberals
have a vested interest in seeing oppression prevail. Success in Afghanistan
would have meant a victory for Bush at home. I’m surprised John Kerry isn’t
over there complaining about butterfly ballots and hanging chads. Afghanistan is
a brand-new democracy. Give it a little time and have some patience. The same
goes for the massive quantities of opium over which Kerry and other liberals are
hyperventilating. Listen, once Bush has a handle on the oil in Iraq, then I’m
sure he’ll be happy to go ferret out your drugs over in Afghanistan. For
liberals, massacres, torture, discrimination, racism and sexism are fine as long
they’re being conducted by third-world tyrants like Saddam Hussein, the
Taliban, or Fidel Castro. Interruption of any of the aforementioned activities
may be deemed acceptable only if the entire third-world contingent at the United
Nations is on-board. Kerry calls this his “global test”. Liberals go insane
over Iraqi insurgents being forced to play ‘naked pyramid’ at Abu Ghraib
prison, yet they figure Bush shouldn’t have rushed in to stop Saddam Hussein
from executing thousands of political prisoners. Bush obviously saw a problem
with State Department statistics indicating that Hussein beheaded more than 130
women in less than a year and was starving his own people by stashing food
supplies from the Oil-for-Food program in his own warehouses, but John Kerry
still feels that Bush’s actions were ‘rushed’. If I’m ever getting the
life beaten out of me in a dark alley somewhere, I hope the guy who happens to
be walking by isn’t John Kerry. Even in 1990, when the entire world wanted
Saddam Hussein
out of Kuwait, Kerry voted against authorizing the use of force. All
spin aside, these are the simple facts on Iraq: Saddam Hussein had weapons of
mass destruction. The onus was on him to show evidence of their destruction, and
he didn’t. UN sanctions against him weren’t working because he was
circumventing them by gaming the Oil-for-Food program. He
had various close dealings with al-Qaeda terrorists. The Kerry/Edwards campaign
has acknowledged that at least 60 countries are harboring al-Qaeda terrorists,
yet somehow they figure that Iraq was never one of them. It’s pretty clear
that George W. Bush found the biggest weapon of mass destruction of all when
coalition forces dug him out, unkempt and unshaven, from that hole near Tikrit
If John Kerry is incapable of identifying an obvious threat, how could he be
capable of handling one?
Get
the Updated Popup Blocker! free
download! The
situation in Iraq is still messy, but as First Sgt. Steve Valley of the Combined
Information Press Center in Baghdad says, the insurgency is manageable. And when
free elections take place early next year, the terrorists will have lost
everything they were fighting for. Despite skewed media reports focusing on the
negative, things are looking up over there. Pre-war oil production levels of 2.5
million barrels per day are being exceeded. Seventy-two health care clinics are
currently under construction (thirteen have been completed). Reconstruction
projects have created jobs for 83,000 Iraqis and 310 Iraqi firms. Twelve new
electricity generation projects are under construction. Iraqi police, army and
National Guard battalions have been trained and should be ready to take over
completely from the Americans by the January elections, with Americans only
sticking around after that to serve at the will of the new Iraqi government. If it was up to John Kerry, none of this would have ever been possible. He’d still be exchanging strongly worded letters with Saddam Hussein and planning his next summit. Or, more likely, just planning his next ‘plan’. Rachel
Marsden is a political strategist, columnist and talk show host who has worked in
politics and the media in both the USA and Canada.
Her website is www.rachelmarsden.com
|
|
|
Home | PUSA Columnists | Talking Heads | Links | Submit | Contact Opinions
expressed do not necessarily reflect those of PoliticalUSA.com.
|
