New Civilization News: Democrats For Bush By Thomas Sowell    
 Democrats For Bush By Thomas Sowell14 comments
4 Sep 2004 @ 00:39, by Bruce Kodish

Well, I'm registered as a "Democrat."
The first major Republican I voted for, for a major office, was Arnold Schwartzenegger for Governor of my fair state. And now it looks as if I'm going to vote for George Bush.

Thomas Sowell puts things well for me.

If you're shaking your head in wonderment and disbelief, I have lots of friends and loved ones who shake their heads too. Ah well.
--BIK


Democrats for Bush
by Thomas Sowell
Jewish World Review Sept. 3, 2004

"Democratic Senator Zell Miller's electrifying speech at the Republican convention may overshadow the fact that another well-known Democrat — New York's former mayor, Ed Koch — has also crossed party lines to support and campaign for President George W. Bush."

"Never a shrinking violet, Ed Koch says that he disagrees with President Bush on virtually all domestic issues, but that the over-riding issue of our time is the war on terrorism — and that his own Democratic Party doesn't have the "stomach" (Koch's word) for the fight. Mayor Koch understands that if we don't win the war on terrorism, nothing else is going to matter."

"Supporters of both political parties, as well as independent voters, all need to understand what Ed Koch understands: This election is about life and death, in an age when nuclear weapons can be developed and sold to terrorists."

"This election is not even about who will be in the White House for the next four years. It is about a war that must be fought for more years than any given President will occupy the White House."

"Just one weak administration can make the job harder for the administrations that follow — and disastrous for the country."

"No small part of the audacity of those who attacked this country on September 11th, 2001 resulted from the weakness of the Clinton years, when there were only token responses to acts of terrorism against Americans at home and abroad."

"When the World Trade Center was first attacked, during the Clinton administration, that terrorist bombing by Islamic extremists was treated as a simple criminal matter and swept under the rug. Clinton similarly swept under the rug the bombing of our embassies abroad and bought off the North Koreans by helping them with their nuclear program, in exchange for promises that they never kept."

"It was all about getting bad news off the front page and passing along the hard underlying problems to his successors. But the problem goes deeper than Bill Clinton."

"Since 1972, when the far left took control of the Democratic Party, Congressional Democrats have regularly voted against military spending and against spending for the intelligence services. For nearly two decades, John Kerry has voted consistently against military preparedness and against money for the very intelligence agencies that he now so loudly criticizes."

"When the Soviets put nuclear missiles in Eastern Europe, pointed at Western Europe, Ronald Reagan countered by putting American nuclear missiles in Western Europe, pointed at the Soviet Union. John Kerry advocated a "nuclear freeze" instead. In other words, freeze the Soviet advantage in place."

"Some media pundits say that Senator Kerry's poor showing in the polls is due to his having followed the wrong political strategy in this campaign. They say he put too much emphasis on his Vietnam war record."

"But what else did he have to put emphasis on?"

"Can you run for office during a war on terrorism by citing a voting record that includes being anti-military for decades? Can you even rely on a Senate record in favor of welfare state spending, at a time when handing out goodies takes a back seat to national security?"

"What was left for Senator Kerry, except trying to resurrect Vietnam, with his own spin on it, and making big promises for the future? Moreover, with the media on his side — 12 to 1 inside the Beltway — he had little to fear from that quarter."

"How could Kerry know that the Swiftboat men who served with him in Vietnam would suddenly emerge to challenge his version of what happened there? Or that two prominent members of his own party would become so disgusted with him that they would throw their support to Bush?"

"The media have made such a bugaboo about "negative" statements or "attacks" that you might think political campaigns are supposed to be nothing but happy talk. But which is worse, that some unpleasant facts come out during a campaign or that someone is allowed to lie his way into the White House, with all our lives in his hands, on the basis of image and spin?"

Here's the link to the article, Democrats For Bush. While there head on over to Sowell's archives, where you can be sure find something to irritate you if you consider yourself a 'progressive liberal'.

[< Back] [New Civilization News]

Category:  

14 comments

4 Sep 2004 @ 04:23 by vaxen : War on terror?
You mean a war on the American people do'nt you? The so called 'War on Terror,' conducted by the so called 'mightiest power on earth' is a sham! We created the terrorists, financed them, and are undoubtedly still doing so in a variety of ways via lots of 'hidden' lines!

Actually I should say that the world banking industry is financing 'both sides,' as they have always done! An economy based on debt? A fiat currency and a Federal Reserve owned by foreign investors. Yeah, right, war on terror? Who are the real terrorists? Not Al Qaeda which is a fiction!

Do you really believe that a rag tag band of Arabs, of all people, could really threaten anyone? Please, Bruce, dig a little deeper and see tha face of the real enemy emerge. It is not Bin Laden who is really a CIA 'asset!' It certainly had nothing to do with Saddam, a USA shill! The USA put him in there in the first place!

Try getting a few first hand reports on who is 'winning.' Study the initial 'rhetoric' like Cheyne. Bush's 50 year war on terror! They are the real terror!  

4 Sep 2004 @ 11:53 by jazzolog : Is Kerry Being Framed Here?
It seems Mr. Sowell's chief goal is to frame John Kerry as opposed to the so-called War On Terror. I only wish Kerry were more dubious about the whole deal, but the fact is he has a plan to continue its conduct without quite the personal and financial involvement of Mr. Bush and his beneficiaries. Kerry seeks to repair the alliances that were in place on 9/11 with the people of the entire civilized world, and proceed against terrorists on that foundation. Kerry's individual votes in the Senate against particular weapons projects of mass destruction does not indicate at all an anti-military view, but an attempt to thwart a trough of pork (which means, for folks outside the States, amendments to bills that include projects by congresspeople to benefit home constituents).  

4 Sep 2004 @ 16:32 by rishi : Here's your "War on Terror"
Bkodish, let's see if you can chant "USA!", "USA!" after you read this...

Cancer and birth defects have been spreading like wildfire in Iraq since the 1991 US-led Gulf War, prompting doctors to describe them as the Iraqi version of flu. Depleted uranium (DU) used by the United States and its allies against Iraq has taken its toll on around 120,000 to 140,000 Iraqis, according to the latest estimates released by the Iraqi health ministry.

With Iraq becoming an almost radioactive toxic wasteland, the number of birth defects and cancer-infected Iraqis is on the rise day in and day out due to the lingering effects of the deadly nuclear substance, the London-based Al-Quds Press news agency reported Tuesday, July 27.

Read more:
[link]


[The use of "depleted uranium" for bombs is forbidden by the Geneva Convention btw, but that doesn't stop Bush&Blair from using them.]  

4 Sep 2004 @ 16:56 by jmarc : the birth defects
were there long before the war, because of saddam's use of chemical weapons on his own people.Poisoned his own well, basicly. The geneva convention is a farce and is there for one purpose, to give the winners of any war legal recourse for putting the left over enemies away.  

4 Sep 2004 @ 17:13 by rishi : I beg your pardon?
Since when do "chemical weapons" leave a radioactive trace?  

4 Sep 2004 @ 17:31 by spells : Fascists
This Zell Miller, (Democrat) is a fascist and so are the Bush administration- Replican right. In other words, they're just like the Nazis, bent on world conquest. You might as well be supporting the nazis, which is a little ironic don't you think, o'wandering Jew?

See my log "Ascend, Evolve, Expand" for a full article on this horrendous spectacle at the Republican National Convention...  

4 Sep 2004 @ 18:50 by b : Rag tag thinking
56 Muslim nations banded together in the UN dominate world influence against Western civilization and Ju's. PRC(China) is intent on domination and world power. The alliance of France, Germany, Russia wants dominance of world power. USA is one country of almost 200 countries in the world. She will defend herself, our sovreignty and our integrety as a nation dedicated to liberty for all. All your name calling won't wash out facts. Rishi and Spells, you are the neo nazi's. And Jew haters to the core.
You have no right to call Bruce, wandering jew. By your own admissions neither you or rishi have a place to sleep other then a car from time to time.
So who wanders??? You do nothing here but whine, complain, offer no solutions and have nothing. Who wants to be like you?  

4 Sep 2004 @ 19:02 by bkodish : Hi b !
The map reflects the map-maker. Applies to me. Applies to you. Applies to others.

I agree with your thumbnail analysis of world situation and U.S. role in it.

I am not bothered by being called "Nazi-like" by spells.

Someone want to call me a "wandering Jew." Go ahead. I've done my share of wandering. Though I call myself a "wondering Jew."  

4 Sep 2004 @ 21:57 by spells : Insane
It is pointless to speak to the insane.  

4 Sep 2004 @ 22:21 by bkodish : To me...
spells' evaluation of the Bush administration, Republicans and myself as Nazi-like and Nazioid-supporters (a reasonable paraphrase?), seems overwrought, to say the least. I consider spells mistaken. She considers me "insane."

If you consider it pointless to speak to l'il ol' 'insane' me, well, I guess I'll have to live with that.  

4 Sep 2004 @ 23:03 by craiglang : Other Democrats
Unfortunately, another democratic mayor, Rendy Kelly of St. Paul, also came out and endorsed Bush. One of the things I've learned from DFL (Democrat-Farm-Labor party, the Democratic party in MInnesota) circles is that he was probably offered a job in a second (God forbid) Bush administration, in return for his support. Given the difference in philosophies, that would be the only way that I can see that this would have occurred.

It would be interesting to see what Ed Koch was offered for his support...  

4 Sep 2004 @ 23:06 by craiglang : Life and Death...
Actually the way I see it, the quote from Koch is somewhat accurate. It really IS about life and death. Only I believe that it is the life/death of humanity as a whole.

Will we destroy humanity by bringing environmental catastrophe down upon ourselves? And of what import is a "war on terror" if humanity is extinct, and the Earth is unliveable?  

4 Sep 2004 @ 23:59 by b : The importance of survival
The penalty of not surviving is to succumb. It is best not to ignore the word war. War is happening around us. There is a state of war that exists between USA and terrorists and those who harbor them. Preventing it, preempting it makes sense to survive. Giving up the will to fight terror is to succumb to it.
Gaia takes care of the environment. We should help her. I hope that you are watering your plants Craiglang.

Hi Bruce:) I came by when I saw that rishi and spells had stopped here.
I think Spells was refering to me as insane. I am always a mind blower for her and rishi. But, it could be lil ole you. Maybe we will find out. I hope it is not with a big long paste from a socialist rag.
 

5 Sep 2004 @ 00:21 by craiglang : Insanity and watered plants
Both insanity and well-watered plants can be healthy at the right times. Sometimes the insane are the most sane. And sometimes plants can be overwatered... :-)

As for the war, "b" you may be right, we really are at war. But who is the enemy? And is war the real answer? Some heavy questions on a Saturday afternoon (in the Central Daylight timezone, anyway...).  

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
Subject:       
Comment:
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

Other entries in
31 Aug 2008 @ 12:48: Election '08: You Make Me Feel So Young!
12 Aug 2008 @ 09:13: Truth, Denial and Fascism
5 Aug 2008 @ 20:08: Alexanders Ragtime Band
24 Mar 2008 @ 20:50: Is it time?
29 Feb 2008 @ 06:49: Vote For MRS. Barack Obama!
24 Feb 2008 @ 13:25: What's With Hillary?
19 Feb 2008 @ 21:28: Letter to presidential candidates
18 Feb 2008 @ 10:26: Is Obama The Answer?
4 Feb 2008 @ 19:45: Citizen McCain
31 Jan 2008 @ 19:53: The King of Mountebanks?

[< Back] [New Civilization News] [PermaLink]?