After the terrorists' sneak attacks on New York and Washington, our president - when it counted most - really united our country in one strong, solid front of commitment to help the survivors as well as of patriotic fervor to best prepare us for the battles that lay ahead.
    Were the Democrats choosing to unite with us? Or were many of them questioning why Air Force One didn't immediately make a bee-line right into the middle of a city that, for all we knew, would be attacked again - as if his wisely waiting to return during the early evening somehow made him, in their view, less brave? (Didn't take long for the Democrats' high-sounding words of support and unity to turn out to be just that - words.)

In the face of the Taliban's defiance - a regime harboring the head of the attackers, Osama bin Laden, and his fellow murderers of Americans - our president united our Nation and its brave defenders first in demanding that the Taliban hand over the terrorists, and when it refused, going into Afghanistan and decimating al Qaeda's forces there and killing or capturing most of its leaders and members.
    Were the Democrats choosing to unite with us? Or were they questioning why our president was issuing an ultimatum to a third world country and not going through the United Nations, and even questioning whether the war there was all about oil?

More examples of Democrats trying to divide the Nation (in addition to the War Between the States) are: undermining the effectiveness of the USA PATRIOT Act, Senator Rockefeller's treasonous memo, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and AWOL-Gate. (Apparently Demobrats don't know the meaning of the word "honorable" - as in honorable discharge. If a fighter pilot goes AWOL he or she simply doesn't get that kind of discharge. Duh. Yeah, some real unitin' there by the Dorkorats.)

In the many, many cases where our president did try to reach out his hand to the Demojerks - including Teddy Kennedy's No Child Left Behind, Bill Klintoon's "Assault Weapons" Ban extension, and Medicare reform - they turned around each time and bit him. Invariably looking out for themselves, their motivation and goal is not what's best for the American people but whatever can give them the most partisan advantage. (When was the last time you heard of a Demorat (sic) reaching out its hand to our president?) There's just no dealing with untrustworthy people like that.

You cannot play fair with someone who steadfastly refuses to follow any rules. Especially when that person is desperate to win at any cost, and has nothing to lose by breaking all the rules. That person will do and say anything and everything he believes might help him to win. By no means can you afford to let any such a person win, because once he does he will continue to break every rule just so he can stay in that position.

To make it a fair fight you, too, must throw away the rulebook, take off the gloves, and pound that honorless scum into the ground with everything you've got until he can't get back up. Then you must pound him some more just to make sure he never will be able to get up again. Finally, when you believe he's down for the count, you must pound him once more so that his dirtnap is permanent. No mercy. No prisoners. That's still much more than he deserves. His unruly rule-breaking has earned him this treatment.

Our president fortunately gained experience handily beating one of the dirtiest-poolers around, Ann "Silver Foot" Richards, after he successfully campaigned for governor of Texas. This time his opponent looks to be just as much in need of similar chlorination, with about the same amount of factual scrupulousness used by the lamestream media:

Bush is a state-of-the-art fighter-jet pilot.

Kerry is a swifty-wifty boat driver.

Bush served his country in uniform throughout the full hitch he signed up for.

Kerry ditched his country as soon as he could by using a loophole in the service rules which allowed him to turn those three scrapes he received into a fast-n-easy early chicken-out ticket to the States so he could, the very minute he got back home, lie about and badmouth our truly brave servicemen and women.

Bush never killed any civilians during his service in our armed forces.

Kerry killed many civilians and admitted to committing war atrocities (e.g., hunting down and killing a wounded North Vietnamese soldier instead of taking him prisoner - even after he tried to surrender to Kerry) during his "glorious" military career (which lasted only long enough for him to find some easy way to weasel his way out of serving his country).

Bush is never called bad names (lame liberal labels like Shrub, Dubya, Bushy, Cowboy, and Bush Jr. are little more than cute).

Kerry is called Hanoi John F'ing Al-Qerry, Botox Breath, Haughty French-looking Liberal, BTW Isiv (By The Way I Served In Vietnam), Flip-Flopping Fraud, Lurch, Longface Loser, Mr. Heinz Ketchup King, Rich-Widow Gold Digger, Kennedy Flunky, The Real Stiff, The Boring Bostonian, The Pompous Prettyboy Panderer, Huge Head Hypocrite, No JFK!, Whiny Wimp, Dukakis' Lieutenant Governor, Democratic Senator from Massachusetts, et al.

Bush will act (preemptively, if necessary) to protect America.

Kerry says the president should act even more preemptively: "This president always makes decisions late, after things have happened that could have been different had the president made a different decision earlier."

Bush never took part in any plot to kill U.S. Government officials.

Kerry did.

Bush is, looks, and sounds young and fresh, ready to fight the terrorists.

Kerry is, looks, and sounds old and worn out, wanting someone else (like the United Nation) to give us permission first before we can fight the terrorists.

Bush speaks with a tough Texas accent.

Kerry speaks with a snooty-sounding Boston accent, and speaks fluent French - just like his back-stabbing French pal president Jacques René Chirac (who by the way adores Kerry).

Bush married a nice librarian lady.

Kerry married a dead Republican's wife.

Bush has been endorsed by every God-fearing American and true ally of the United States across the planet.

Kerry has been endorsed by all the two-bit dictators, thugs, tyrants, terrorists, weasels, and other assorted enemies of America on the planet (e.g., France, al Qaeda, North Korea, New York Times), as well as Teddy "Girldrowner" Kennedy and Al Sharpton.

Bush is not a Duhmocrat.

Kerry is.

Bush doesn't cuss at the brave Secret Service agents who are protecting him.

Kerry does and then lies about it.

Bush has never been accused of having affairs with interns then sending them off to Africa where they'll be silenced.

Kerry has.

Bush says war is never good, not even when it's necessary.

Kerry says war is good unless it makes W. looks good.

Bush called terrorist leader Yasser Arafat "irrelevant."

Kerry called Yasser Arafat "a statesman and role model."

Bush is not a liberal and will tell you he isn't.

Kerry's a liberal but won't tell you he is.

The overriding fact of the matter is the same one that convincingly supported Roosevelt's reelection during World War II: You don't change horses in midstream. The total destruction of all bloodthirsty terrorists is a stream we must cross to keep ourselves from drowning in a raging undertow of relentless attacks which they plan against our cities. Bush is the horse we've been riding successfully toward that other bank where the threat of terrorist attacks is significantly diminished. Terrorists would love to see us switch in midstream and take our chances on an unproven horse - a horse they already like better than the tried-and-true one we're riding now.

We can't turn around and go back to that far more dangerous bank. We can't change horses now and risk falling off and drowning. We must push forward on the horse we have. It's really the best chance we have of ever making it to the other side safely and united.

	3:26 PM

Comments (registered users)