Why the World Cannot Afford a Kerry Presidency

VANCOUVER, British Columbia (October 18/04) -- 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:

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!

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: 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?

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.

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?

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 (rachelmarsden.com) is a public affairs and communications strategist, columnist and talk show host who has worked in politics and media in the United States and Canada.

Fresh air for a change, and thank you for it. I don't know how I'm going to get through the next couple of weeks. The shriekers in the media are cranking up the decibels and the international media are chiming in. We're defeated in Iraq, Bush personally contaminated that flu vaccine so his wealthy buddies could profit from the plague, we're gonna draft 13-year-olds, yadda yadda blah blah blah in the name of God would you all just SHUT UP?

Sorry.

The real problem, as I see it, is that after Bush wins they'll still be at it like teething infants. I see a tidal wave of hatred being whipped up by those who really haven't anything constructive to do in the world, like building a clinic in Iraq or ending the genocide in Darfur. I see more lies, more hysteria, more deliberate misrepresentation, more insensate rage.

But you know what? It'll be worth it.

The real reason why

I didn't think of this! Most of us haven't thought about this no matter how much we like or dislike John Kerry. WOW! Those figures have to be staggering.

He is one of the richest Senators in Government. When someone is elected president, it means the Secret Service has to protect the President and his family as well as his property.

The Kerry's have five US properties not counting the several foreign properties they own too. The cost to run these homes are more than what the average American could afford, even if the rent was free, and all you had to pay the water, gas &electric. Including ground keepers, maintenance, pool, and house keepers. To be President would require the taxpayers to pay for all that now if elected. Including a complete staffed Secret Service security 24 hours a day. In addition to that we will have to pay for each of their homes for security improvements even if they never go to them all, that is, that just in case. Who do you think will pay for all this? We Pay! This takes all the expense off Kerry and puts it on us.

Nevertheless, factor another major cost to Americans that Kerry does not want you to know about. Becoming president would automatically include taking care of all their properties with Secret Service Agents that includes 5 agents per 6 hour shift 4 times a day 365 days of the year for the rest of their lives so long as they own those properties. It comes with being President, once you are elected. It requires us the taxpayers, to pay for this as well as his annual salary, as well as his retirements including the cost of living adjustments to boot, plus salaries and protection for all their real estate property, plus Secret Service Agents, and pay the bills for the rest of his life. In addition, feed the Secret Service Agents and rotate new ones every 6 hours for the rest of his life.

Do the math. Five properties need to be protected. This requires five Secret Service Agents per shift, daily every six hours, per property! That is 20 Secret Service Agents per day per property everyday including Holidays. Wow, what does that cost?

Lets say an average of 20 agents per property, each earning a about $60K per agent to survey the perimeters and protect. Now times that by five properties so far. That is if the Kerrys do not buy any more properties afterwards. This also includes the Agents vehicles and repairs, gas, meals, days off, paid vacation, and medical plan visits etc per agent.

Who pays? YOU pay, the whole time they are alive after becoming President! Is this the best use of our tax money electing Kerry to take care of all their properties, both foreign and domestic? On the other hand, shouldn't he pay for his own? Yet, the Presidential salary could not afford it.

The more I think about paying for Kerrys properties everyday, just makes me happy keeping President Bush all the more merrier. Without raising taxes to boot.

How on earth would Kerry pay for everyone to have Healthcare, increase our military, and have us pay to protect his investments, all without raising our taxes? Tax and spend Kerry is his party motto.

Which really has to make you wonder why anyone with his wealth, would take a salary of that of a U.S. Senator, never mind wanna be President? Do you believe now why he needs to be the Prez? To serve the people? On the other hand, the people serve Him and his wife!

Please pass the Mustard and do America a favor and pass this to your friends, lets keep Bush a resident in the White House, and not have to protect another Kerry house. So think this one over and then have a nice day.

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.