Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Open Letter to the Undecided Voter (Excellent for sending to all your friends)
Men's News Daily ^ | Oct. 17, 2004 | Joe Mariani

Posted on 10/17/2004 10:28:46 AM PDT by FairOpinion

The polls keep telling us there are still undecided voters out there. It's hard to believe, but I imagine they're the people who don't really pay attention to all the political stuff until they have to -- the way I used to be, in fact. The downside is that with less than a month to go, it's hard for them to get all the information they need, with all the Democrats spinning and spouting talking points like mad, aided by the "mainstream" media. Several times I've been asked why an undecided voter would choose to vote for President Bush. This is my answer.

First of all, and most importantly, President Bush has precisely the right idea on how to fight terrorism. Not only do we have to fight individual terrorists, but every nation or group that harbors, supplies, trains, or uses terrorists to attack their enemies must stop doing so. Their leaders must renounce the support of terror -- as Libya and Pakistan have done -- or face sanctions and diplomatic pressure -- as Syria does now -- culminating in the use of force if necessary. Al-Qaeda is Arabic for "the base." They're not an isolated group; their aim is to coordinate the activities of all terrorist groups, even non-Islamic ones like the Basque terror group ETA. This war is not about one group -- or one man, though Democrats like to characterise the entire war on terror as a single-minded manhunt for Osama bin Laden. It's far bigger than that. Kerry's idea is to fight al-Qaeda (and what if they change their name?) by negotiation and law enforcement means. You can't stop dictators from employing terror as a weapon by going to the UN, which gives them legitimacy and power. You can't stop them by arresting the foot soldiers of terror after they commit their "crimes." It's the same approach Clinton used, and it never stopped a single terrorist attack. That method doesn't work.

It's ridiculous to say that Iraq was a bad idea, or a diversion from the war on terror. Because Saddam has been removed, we don't have to wonder what he had hidden, or whether he would use it against us. We don't have to worry about his using the threat of WMDs to rule Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Iran. He refused to come clean despite 12 years and 17 UN resolutions, and was too great a threat based on his past behavior to leave alone. He was on the list of terror-sponsoring nations since the list was first created, with ties to several terror groups as well as international terror leaders like Abu Nidal. As a result of the war in Iraq, 25 million Iraqis no longer have to live under his regime of terror, torture and totalitarian brutality. Because we removed Saddam, we've uncovered and stopped the Pakistan nuclear proliferation ring, and Moammar Ghaddafi of Libya has renounced his WMD programs -- which were closer to fruition than we'd ever dreamed -- and his links to global terror. If Saddam had done so, it would have stopped the war. More importantly, perhaps, we've uncovered the extent of the corruption within the UN itself, as Saddam had turned the Oil-for-Food program into his personal cash cow. The Duelfer report revealed that Saddam was only awaiting the end of the sanctions to start brewing WMDs again, which he could have done within weeks. He never gave up his intention to do so, nor to use them to make himself a world power. We would have had to face him down sooner or later, and sooner was better, while he was still relatively weak.

On the subject of foreign relations, you must know that every policy proposal Kerry has put forward has already failed, yet he keeps plugging away. France, Germany and Russia have rejected Kerry's plan for them to send troops to Iraq. Iran has rejected Kerry's plan to give them nuclear fuel to stop them from making nuclear fuel (must be a nuance thing). China and Japan have rejected Kerry's plan to open bilateral talks with North Korea, after they have spent years working with us to get Kim Jong Il to allow six-way multilateral negotiations. What does that mean for us, if Kerry gets elected? We will have no actual plans to deal with any of the current problems in the world that anyone -- except Kerry -- agrees with. And with the way he and his advocates have been insulting every country in the world that helped us in Iraq, he won't be able to find any allies among them. His own sister went to Australia, one of our biggest allies in Iraq, to campaign against Prime Minister Howard. She told the Aussies that they were in danger of a terrorist attack because they sent troops to Iraq, which Howard's opponent pledged to withdraw. Good on the Aussies, who re-elected Howard anyway.

On the economy, Bush also has the right idea. Cutting taxes gives small businesses the chance to expand and grow, as they have been doing for 11 straight quarters. The job numbers you hear about from the "mainstream" media are only half the story -- the Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes both the Payroll Survey, which covers only large, established corporations, and the Household Survey, which covers small businesses, entrepreneurs, startups and consultants. As National Review Online noted after checking with the BLS: "Real-estate agents, general contractors, and self-employed professionals such as lawyers, accountants, and financial planners just aren’t part of [the Payroll] number." The Payroll survey is the only one that ever gets any media attention, but it's not the group which benefits most from the tax cuts. For instance, remember the disappointing August job creation numbers? The media and Democrats were crowing over the low payroll figure of 32,000 (later upgraded to 73,000), while totally ignoring the household figure of 629,000 new jobs created by small businesses! More businesses, more people working means more tax revenue, even at the lower rate. It's like an elementary school math problem: which makes you more money, 5 pies sold at $5 each, or 8 pies sold at $4 each, if it costs you $1 to make each pie? More tax revenue combined with spending controls means the deficit will shrink -- the projections show it'll be cut in half in five years. It also means more people NOT dependent on the government for their income, which means more individual freedom.

The Democrats are running a fear campaign about outsourcing, which has been happening since the Industrial Revolution as technology progresses in some places faster than others. They don't want you to know that insourcing has more than offset outsourcing -- just look up how many factories Hyundai, Samsung, Nissan, Honda and Mercedes have opened in the US. Companies like Turck (Germany), ING (Holland), Nestle (Switzerland) and Gamesa (Spain) among many others employ tens of thousands of Americans right here in America. The Democrats are only telling you one side of the free trade story.

One more thing about the economy: how can the Democrats complain that President Bush hasn't given enough money to certain programs while simultaneously complaining about the deficit? Their biggest complaint about No Child Left Behind and Medicare is not that too much money was spent on them, but that not ENOUGH money was spent! First, please remember that Congress holds the purse-strings, not the President. Second, it's just the Democrats' way of complaining, as they have always done, about spending money on the military... which, quite frankly, is the only Constitutionally-mandated legitimate government expense. It was due to Clinton's slashing of the military that we had to send the National Guard to fight a war, when their job is supposed to be guarding the homeland. Now John Kerry is complaining that they didn't have enough ammunition and body armor... which is strange, because he voted not to fund ammunition and body armor for them after they were already in combat. There is no excuse for that.

As for the fear of President Bush's religion influencing the decisions he makes... as an agnostic myself, it doesn't scare me. Almost all our Presidents have been very religious men. The majority of Americans are religious people. The fact that he's religious means he has moral values and principles, which our leaders should always have. The fact that he's open about it lets us know what those values are. Don't forget that the President does not act alone; Congress passes and repeals Federal laws (except, of course, when laws are created or struck down by judicial fiat, which needs to be stopped). This country was founded on laws derived from Judeo-Christian principles. English common law was (rather loosely) based on the Ten Commandments, as per William Blackstone's "Commentaries." Our own documents and monuments are full of references that prove the existence of this rather benign relationship. What his religion DOES influence is his compassion for others. I prefer a President who wants to do the right thing, who wants to help others, who has moral values that don't change and principles that don't bend with the wind. I don't think I could respect a President who says that he views abortion as murder (for instance), but doesn't mind if it happens every day.

Oh, one more thing while we're on the subject of principles: the French. They didn't just vote against us in the Security Council, they actively lobbied other countries on the council to vote against us, all on Saddam's behalf. They sold him their vote on the Security Council in return for oil. They sold the brutal dictator weapons and spare parts with which to fight us, right up until the eve of war. They vetoed the proposed 18th resolution on Iraq before Iraq even got a chance to read it! They chose to side with our enemy, as did the Russians and Chinese, who also had oil deals with him. Jacques Chirac chose oil contracts over France's 200 years of cooperation and friendship with America, and over doing what was right to help the Iraqi people. Chirac is no friend of ours, and it's time we stop pretending that he is. For that matter, the United Nations itself is the most corrupt, morally bankrupt collection of international criminals, totalitarian dictators and terrorist supporters ever assembled outside of a Bond film. President Bush will work with them as much as possible, but when work needs to be done and they balk and dither, they're the ones in the wrong. Take the current situation in Sudan as a prime example. Nothing will be done to help the poor people of Darfur until the US decides to do it. When we do, the cries of "imperialist!" and "warmonger!" will echo in the UN building once again, even as we "unilaterally" prevent a second Rwanda. I really don't believe Kerry would act in Darfur if the UN refuses to, do you?

Last, but not least, you might also want to consider the character and nature of America. The Democrats' main attacks on President Bush rather closely resemble the top ten attacks on him published by the Communist Party: outsourcing jobs, no "free" health care, no tighter corporate restrictions in the name of the environment, tax cuts "for the rich," false claims of his attacking civil rights, and so on. That should demonstrate to you that the Democrats are a little TOO far to the Left to lead a nation which supposedly values individual achievement, personal freedom coupled with personal responsibility, and all of whose citizens are guaranteed the most energetically defended and expansive rights of any nation on Earth.


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: undecided; voters
He covers each point very logically. It may help those who are still really undecided, or just mildly leaning one way or another.
1 posted on 10/17/2004 10:28:47 AM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Bump for later read.


2 posted on 10/17/2004 10:31:18 AM PDT by conservative cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

There are no undecided voters. People either vote or stay home. Voters are passionate for national candidates and bewildered by local candidates. Voters are either passionate OR DEAD!


3 posted on 10/17/2004 10:31:28 AM PDT by sully777 (Our descendants will be enslaved by political expediency and expenditure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sully777

But you are forgetting that dead voters vote for Kerry.

I think undecided voters are less likely to vote, and there are some people who support Kerry, but only very weakly, because they believe the MSM lies. I just spoke with one the other day.


4 posted on 10/17/2004 10:34:27 AM PDT by FairOpinion (FIGHT TERRORISM! VOTE BUSH/CHENEY 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

It makes it clear that threatening with WMD is the same as having WMD... Analogy that a Lawyer would understand. If a guy robs a bank with a gun but no bullets is he still guilty of Bank Robbery. Look it isn't a mistake when everyone believed he had WMD's... Issue closed.


5 posted on 10/17/2004 10:38:09 AM PDT by tomnbeverly (Kerry will bring the Big Dig to Washington in the form of Healthcare becasue thats what liberals do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

"But you are forgetting that dead voters vote for Kerry."

Yes, the democrats are miracle workers. They can even raise the dead. You don't believe me? Just look at the election records in Chicago!

P.S. The can only do it at election time. :-)


6 posted on 10/17/2004 10:38:36 AM PDT by punster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Please forward that letter to everyone on your email contact list and ask they do the same. Hopefully a few undecideds will recieve it and it will sway them to Bush.


7 posted on 10/17/2004 10:38:53 AM PDT by Trepz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

But you are forgetting that dead voters vote for Kerry.



I'd love to read "An Open To the Dead Voter" that would be too funny.


8 posted on 10/17/2004 10:39:16 AM PDT by sully777 (Our descendants will be enslaved by political expediency and expenditure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sully777

9 posted on 10/17/2004 10:42:07 AM PDT by FairOpinion (FIGHT TERRORISM! VOTE BUSH/CHENEY 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Undecided voters are probably too lazy to even read this..too long..takes too much of their valuable time.


10 posted on 10/17/2004 10:46:31 AM PDT by heylady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heylady

Well, you can use this as basis for talking points, when talking to undecided or weak Kerry leaners.


11 posted on 10/17/2004 10:50:42 AM PDT by FairOpinion (FIGHT TERRORISM! VOTE BUSH/CHENEY 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
I just sent the following letter to the editor of my local newspaper.

Editor:

As one who has the utmost respect for the state Democratic party, I am aghast at the fear-mongering and pandering to the uninformed in which the national party currently engages.

Osama Bin Laden, stem cell research, and the draft are only three issues on a virtual litany distorted by the DNC. The situation extends far beyond the mud-slinging and attack ads that people have come to expect. It has reached the point of distorting the truth from so many angles and on so many occasions that no only is truth unrecognizable, no seems to care any longer.

Candidates and their campaign managers should submit to lie detector tests. However, both John Kerry and John Edwards would surely fail: Kerry’s assertions about the missed opportunity to capture Osama Bin Laden and Edward’s statements about Bush preventing stem cell research are false. Osama Bin Laden’s whereabouts were not a certainty, and the U.S. military used massive amounts of troops and fire power in Tora Bora. Until the Bush administration, stem cell research was prohibited. Moreover, DNC operatives started and continue to fuel the rumor that President Bush would re-institute the draft, as if it were completely in his power and not the authority solely of Congress.

The DNC has emailed advice to loyalists everywhere to hammer local editorial pages with letters from supposedly former President Bush supporters who are now denouncing him in favor of Senator Kerry. Your “Letters” section has seen its fair share of the result of such tactics.

With so much air time and print devoted to the presidential campaign, it’s a shame that voters have to use only their instincts, or exert considerable effort to conduct their own research on issues and qualifications. Debates, supposed news broadcasts and documentaries, articles, and persuasive letters are all suspect.

12 posted on 10/17/2004 11:04:21 AM PDT by The Doctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Bump for reference


13 posted on 10/17/2004 11:17:57 AM PDT by mattdono ("Crush the democrats, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of the scumbags" -Big Arnie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Doctor

"With so much air time and print devoted to the presidential campaign, it’s a shame that voters have to use only their instincts, or exert considerable effort to conduct their own research on issues and qualifications."

Excellent letter. You are exactly right. I hope they publish it.

It is a shame that people can't get objective news from the newsmedia.


14 posted on 10/17/2004 11:21:27 AM PDT by FairOpinion (FIGHT TERRORISM! VOTE BUSH/CHENEY 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

bttt


15 posted on 10/17/2004 11:37:41 AM PDT by sauropod (Hitlary: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Don't forget other insourcing corporations in the US. Yoplait and Bic.


16 posted on 10/17/2004 2:36:49 PM PDT by Milligan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

For those we know.


17 posted on 10/17/2004 3:00:02 PM PDT by cgk (Teresa Heinz Kerry: ``The Democratic machine in this country is putrid.'')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

After all we have endured in this election season for someone to be un-decided is to say they are brain dead or unwilling to commit to anything of substance.


18 posted on 10/17/2004 3:41:13 PM PDT by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
"With so much air time and print devoted to the presidential campaign, it’s a shame that voters have to use only their instincts, or exert considerable effort to conduct their own research on issues and qualifications."

Excellent letter. You are exactly right. I hope they publish it.

It is a shame that people can't get objective news from the newsmedia.

Thanks for the encouraging words. The local paper usually publishes my letters. I've written a few Op Ed pieces over the years.

19 posted on 10/17/2004 4:16:10 PM PDT by The Doctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

bttt


20 posted on 10/17/2004 10:53:34 PM PDT by Christian4Bush (John Kerry is a WMJD--Weapon of Massive Job Destruction. Vote Bush/Cheney 2004!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson