Why Democrats must vote for Bush

One issue trumps all the rest this year: George Bush is serious about winning the war on radical Islam, and John Kerry isn't. That's really all there is to it.

Funny, the way I see it is, Kerry is smart enough to win the war on radical Islam, and Bush doesn't have a clue.

Bush thinks the remedy to state-independant militant agents is to wage wars against states. How does that make any sense?

At any rate, I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. Try to keep some perspective - less people died of terrorism in 2001 than died in motorcycle accidents. On the other hand, one in five children live in poverty. I'd say that's a far greater risk to life and limb. Theirs, anyway.

Well said, Chet.

If anything we now have an increased number of threats to deal with than we did before and President Bush doesn't seem to comprehend that in the least bit. We've seen Iran move backward toward a fundamentalist government. We've seen a rise in insurgency in the middle-east due to American presence and we've seen countries unwilling to participate with the US on a global scale. We've taken the wrong road and now it's time to change course.

I'm not professing that Kerry has all the answers but his election is a definitive step in the right direction. We can no longer afford to see everything in black and white in a red, white and blue country.

Funny, the way I see it is, Kerry is smart enough to win the war on radical Islam, and Bush doesn't have a clue.

By doing what, Chet? Retreating to our shores and inviting Abu Musab al-Zarkawi to a UN summit? Gimme a break. Nobody with any common sense thinks Kerry's a bigger threat to the enemy than Bush is. Even opponents of the war in Iraq admit that Kerry's approach simply doesn't fit reality. Sell crazy somewhere else; we're all stocked up here. (Apologies to Melvin Udall)

Bush thinks the remedy to state-independant militant agents is to wage wars against states. How does that make any sense?

The islamists need places to train, refit, recruit, and raise funds. By removing their support system (the sympathetic regime), you choke off their lifeblood. Look at it like killing weeds (the nuisance aspect should appeal to you, being a Kerry backer). To kill weeds, you don't pluck off the leaves ... you poison their roots, tear them up by the roots, or both.

To use another metaphor, you want to smash milk bottles and I want to kill the cow.

At any rate, I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. Try to keep some perspective - less people died of terrorism in 2001 than died in motorcycle accidents. On the other hand, one in five children live in poverty. I'd say that's a far greater risk to life and limb. Theirs, anyway.

Chet, only a man tragically out of touch with reality would think something so patently absurd. If you refuse to see the threat posed by the adherents of an evil ideology who would kill you even before they killed me, then no evidence I offer can persuade you. None of what you care about matters if the islamists kill you.

That's why my focus is utterly crushing you and yours in the political arena. That way, my side can get back to defeating the enemy who would kill us all, and you can go back to enjoying the frivolity and ease you so desperately desire. Just like three-year-old children, you and yours are patriots and mean well. But you cannot be trusted with the adult responsibilities of national defense.

By doing what, Chet?

Well, actually paying attention to the PDB's, for one thing.

I can't say for sure what Kerry will do, because I can't read his mind, obvously. But attacking the source of terror financing is a good start. Easing the Arabic chokehold by reducing our dependance on their oil. Getting Saudi Arabia out of our way.

The islamists need places to train, refit, recruit, and raise funds.

Look, if they can do all that in Florida, like the 9/11 attackers, then they can do it anywhere - they don't need "rogue states" or whatever to do it.

To kill weeds, you don't pluck off the leaves ... you poison their roots, tear them up by the roots, or both.

Ok, but everybody knows that the roots of Islamic extremism are found in Saudi Arabia; but we haven't done anything about that. Do you think maybe that's because of the longstanding business connections between Bush's family and the House of Saud?

Chet, only a man tragically out of touch with reality would think something so patently absurd.

It's not absurd, it's true. More Americans died in motorcycle accidents than in terror attacks in 2001. Look it up, if you want. What's absurd about a perfectly true statement?

If you refuse to see the threat posed by the adherents of an evil ideology who would kill you even before they killed me, then no evidence I offer can persuade you.

I see the threat. I just don't see much of a threat. They don't kill us because they hate us, although they do; the kill us because it accomplishes policy objectives that they have.

Think about it for a minute. There's too may of them, and they're too popular among totally normal Arabs, for them to be born-that-way monsters. That simply fails the sense test.

None of what you care about matters if the islamists kill you.

Ooo! Beware the terrorist boogymen! They might be under your bed!

Look, that shit didn't scare me when I was six, and it sure doesn't scare me as a grown man. You should be ashamed of yourself.

That's why my focus is utterly crushing you and yours in the political arena.

Yeah, good luck with that. I think you'll find that Americans have more sense that to belive in the boogyman.

That way, my side can get back to defeating the enemy who would kill us all,

How do you think third-world guerillas are going to kill every single American? Aren't you blowing this way out of proportion for cheap political gain? Sure looks like it.

Go back to hiding under the bed and shitting your pants every time someone swarthy walks by. Leave running the country to the adults, please.

Wow. Puddle Pirate, do you and Chet have a history that I'm missing?

Just out of curiosity, what are your plans if/when the election turns out in favor of Kerry?

Do I detect a common theme here? Love it! The only issue that matters!

Wow. Puddle Pirate, do you and Chet have a history that I'm missing?

No, I just think it's asinine and immature to try to scare people into voting for your guy. If we had waited until the world was totally safe for everybody before we did anything else, women and black people would still be waiting for the vote - hell, black people would still be waiting as slaves. "You can't be free if you're dead", PP would say. "Sorry, that emancipation thing is going to have to wait. Whatever you do, vote Douglas, not Lincoln."

Your average American simply isn't at any significant risk of terror; no more than they're at risk of dying in a motorcycle accident unless they ride motorcycles. Which isn't to say that there's no risk at all; but the lion's share of the risk has been and will continue to be borne by those who, for whatever reason, might constitute an attractive target to terrorists.

9/11 didn't change the world. Maybe it woke some people up, but the world was the same it had always been. It's not going to go back to the way it was, ever; I'm not willing to live the rest of my life under fake wartime conditions and pesudo-temporary suspension of civil liberties.

Chet and Pud... you two seem to have some preposterous notion that people who will KILL you just because you don't wear a 9-inch beard and force the women in your life to wear burkas when they go out of the house (only escorted by a male relative!) are functioning in a vacuum.

They aren't.

They are being supported by STATES, and Saddam was one of the primary supporters. The Iraqis tell us that there were, in fact, Al Qaeda at Salman Pak, among other terrorist groups. Not that Al Qaeda is the only group we're after. Virtually ALL terrorist groups in the US declared war on the US, and most of them did so BEFORE 9/11 or the invasion of Iraq.

9/11 taught us that we can NOT snicker when a group declares a jihad against us. That's what we did in 1998. We have to kill the suckers.

Kerry wants to take us back to the point where we're snickering at declarations of jihad again.

NEVER AGAIN!

Chet & Pud... BTW, I'm with you about getting off the SA oil.

Commence drilling an ANWR and the Gulf of Mexico immediately.

mama,

Don't lump me in with Chet. This is my explicitly anti-Islamist and anti-terrorist-state blog after all.

I know the Islamists need state support. I guess I wasn't clear enough. I support regime change in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Sudan, etc. ... without violence if practical, but with extreme violence otherwise. These people are evil, and evil respects force.

They are being supported by STATES, and Saddam was one of the primary supporters.

Supporters of who, exactly? Support in what way?

If all it takes is letting terrorists live and train in your state to be considered "support", then Jeb Bush is a supporter of terror, too.

9/11 taught us that we can NOT snicker when a group declares a jihad against us. That's what we did in 1998. We have to kill the suckers.

And I plan to vote for the candidate that will do that.

John Kerry.