American Crossroads

As an American, I have a very real interest in what is happening in the world and how politics is affecting the internal American debate. It seems to me that many in this country have been unable to move on from the controversy of the 2000 election. Many were unhappy with the result and that is understandable since individual voters want their candidate to win. This was a very "messy" time in America. Some Floridians votes were inaccurately made, punctures incomplete, others were confused by the butterfly format of the ballot, some were ruled ineligible to vote because of non registration, felony conviction, or in the case of the military votes, lack of a postmark because of the way they were shipped, bypassing a post office. These were unfortunate happenings and I do not want to see any American citizen disenfranchised because of technicalities the voter is not responsible for. This was most noted in Florida because the electoral votes hinged on the outcome. Partisanship was at it most active as the Gore supporters could not accept the ultimate outcome. They cling to the "stolen" election and the "illegitimate" presidency. Many organizations were allowed to recount once again after the question was settled by the Supreme Court and determined that in the final, less hectic recount that George Bush won the majority of Florida votes.
This distasteful start of the Bush presidency has lingered for almost four years. Many have referred to the stolen vote over these difficult years for our nation. George Bush has been under almost constant attack for this with the brief respite after 9/11 when we as a nation came together in our common grief and rage. He has been criticized, ridiculed and subjected to hate speech and distortions of truth.
He took seven minutes to react! Could he have been thinking during this time while attempting to avoid alarm among the young children? Had he been told of the tragedies and possibly been told to sit tight for a bit while arrangements were being made for his safe being and methods by which he could exit without panicking the nation? Nobody knows for certain, but this seems plausible to me.
The media, while they still were reporting rapid developments after 9/11 appeared to indicate that this man whose abilities they doubted had risen to the occasion and was a comfort to the nation. His appearance at ground zero and his promise that the terrorists would hear from us were widely heralded and served to give us confidence in this man.
Decisions were made. Congress, with bipartisan support, voted to give President Bush the authority to act both in Afghanistan and Iraq. It took time to gather whatever intelligence we and our allies had. We went to the United Nations for support and found that several countries, who are supposedly allies, were dead set against allowing the USA to seek out the terrorist supporting regime in Iraq. When the food for oil scandal came to light, it was pretty clear to this writer that those countries who oppposed us had motives to keep Saddam in power. President Bush and his cabinet formed a coalition of the willing to persevere despite the lack of UN blessing. John Kerry has repeatedly voiced that we alienated allies because we did not give the UN and those nations the right to dictate our response to the attack on Americans and American interests. He wants to play nicely with those who do not have our best interests at heart while Australia, the UK, Italy, Poland etc. have been denigrated to a status of less improtance than France, Germany and Russia.
Those Americans who still were so bitter over the election and those that realized that in order to defeat Bush in the next election they had to distance themselves from his policies and criticize everything the Bush administration did. If they were so wise and had such better answers, why didn they not offer these suggestions to the American people in a positive way and gain widespread support so we could write our congress to support these views? Why the vitriol against a man who has the most difficult job in the world? This bewilders me to this day. Such hate expressed about an administration who was trying it's best to keep our nation safe and battle terrorists who do not fight according to any rules of engagement certainly affected my views. I lived through WWII and all of the subsequent conflicts and always felt that Americans support their leaders during dark days such as we have gone through. Was the Bush administration 100% right in every aspect of foreign and domestic policies while at war? No, this administration is made up of human beings who like you and I are fallible. Did they deserve our unquestioning support? No, we have the right to question and to suggest viable options. What we should not have the right to do is to give aid and comfort to the enemy by being so divisive and promoting propaganda against our own government. Do the terms sedition and treason have any meaning anymore or are individual rights to do and say anything more important than
being united against a force that would annihilate Americans.

Now the Democratic Party, has as a public relations measure in order to elicit votes, decided they have done enough with their hate Bush tactics and will now present a positive campaign. Al Gore can no longer bellow "George Bush has betrayed America" Move On will no longer compare Bush to Hitler. No announcement as yet about calling off the lawyers who will see to it that this election is not stolen by the Republicans. They will be such nice guys that any defense by the Republicans to their months long hate speech will be seen as negative campaigning. Some of this is just politics as usual but it will not erase their candidates history as to his voting record and his public pronouncements leading up to the Iraq war. He is presenting himself as a war hero. If he is a hero as his medals would attest, he is not one iota more important than any war hero who has fought for this nation in any conflict. This does not elevate him above the citizenry that have fought, been maimed for a lifetime or given their life for America and our security.

When Senator Dole decided to run for the presidency, he resigned his seat in the senate so that his constiuents would continue to have representation. He also was a war hero who has lived with permanent disability from his fight for our freedoms. Why do the Democrats feel their constituents do not deserve the same consideration? I have written to Senator Edwards asking him to resign since he is a senator from my state and I feel that he is not representing my interests. I have written to Senator Dole requesting she stay in Washington during the usual recess since the intelligence reforms need immediate debate. Alas, my other Senator will be busy campaigning. He may fly in for a vote, but where will he be during thoughtful debate?

Kerry said he wants the 9/11 commission to stay on the job for at least 18 months. Is it because he realizes that the senate, congressional and executive oversight has not lived up to their obligation to Americans? After all, President Bush had a full nine months to see to it that the intelligence agencies were truly doing the best job and working cooperatively with each other. A committee that was appointed to seek out what went wrong are now to be tasked with seeing that we get it right as reforms are needed. This tells me Kerry does not have confidence in the congress and a "Kerry administration" to do the job without another group riding shotgun. The need for eighteen months, double the time the Bush administration had to identify and correct problems will be needed. Double standard and increased bureaucracy comes to mind!

Where is the Democratic platform? What are the delegates who represent their districts voicing? What compromises are being worked out between the strong anti-war Democrats and the more moderate or centrist Democrats? How can Kerry continue to voice stances that vary from group to group. How can he justify his past performance and statements with what he says today? What will he say or do tomorrow and the days that follow? President Bush has followed through on his promises. His major shift has occurred regarding nation building and I agreed with his original view and now appreciate the need for continued assistance to the Afghani and Iraqi people. I also know that these people are doing all they can to help build their nations. Their courage is to be commended. I know where George Bush stands. I cannot say the same for John Kerry. I trust Dick Cheney's judgments based on long term service to this country. I voted for Senator Edwards because he has achieved personal goals without being a member of the upper class who never had to struggle. Now I feel John Edwards has reneged on his promises to represent me because he has more important goals.

I have watched all the debates in the Democratic primaries. I saw the diversity in opinions and promises. I have listened to Bush bashing ad infinitum and the only thing I am sure of after all of this is I know the names of the Democratic candidates. I know that Edwards is a charismatic speaker. They promise a better future but I do not know how this will be avhieved. Will their word be be their bond? I truly doubt this based on Kerry's documented wavering ( see link below) and Edwards abandoning the people of North Carolina.


http://www.demsextrememakeover.com/