Time to Choose Between Bush and Kerry

Vincent Fiore

Put aside all of the labels that you have heard in the past year regarding the presidential candidates. Be it John Kerry—the “perennial liberal of our time,” or George W. Bush, an “ultra-right wing ideologue,” this election is about the path of America’s future and what role it will play geopolitically. It is about the policies that will transform America for generations to come. But fundamentally, it is about two different men.

This election campaign for president seemed to begin for liberals the very day that Bush was inaugurated in 2000, nearly four years ago. Democrats were incensed over the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law in favor of Bush. Predictably, the political skirmishes began in earnest against Bush, leading up to the full-blown political war the voters are seeing today.

I am honest enough to admit that if the situation were reversed, we Republicans might have been the ones angrily calling Al Gore a “selected president” without a mandate to govern. Then again, Republicans did not do this in 1960. The political polarization that the media purports to be the basis of all our decisions today could have started with Nixon and Kennedy, but Nixon choose to spare the country instead of seeking the presidency in a court room.

Though Nixon had the right to challenge the outcome of that election, he spared the country by not dividing it, possibly divining the consequences of which we are all living with today.

Upon taking office in 2001, Bush’s presidency was typical in most respects. More pedestrian than pizzazz, Bush had his moments in the sun and some rainy days as well. It was August 9, 2001, and Bush was giving a televised address to the nation regarding his decision on embryonic stem cell research.

Then September 11 happened. It cannot be overstated, ever, that this single event in our country’s post W.W.II history became the defining moment of the generations. Whether you are a product of Generation X, Y, a baby boomer, or even the Greatest Generation, it was an event that transcended age and gender, rich and poor.

As Americans and the world watched in horror as New York’s fabled Twin Towers crashed to the ground, something else happened that continues to this day. Amidst the steel and glass of a million tons of an American symbolism, and the blood and bones of the thousands who perished that day in them, someone stepped up to lead the nation. Bush suddenly became a president with the mandate that the disputed election of 2000 denied him.

Galvanizing the nation with strong words and purpose, Bush set out to defeat terrorism wherever it thrived. In countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines, the Sudan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, all have all felt the presence of George W. Bush in one form or another. In some instances, like Afghanistan and Iraq, it was war. In others, like Pakistan and the Sudan, it was “You’re either with us or against us.”

Here is where the lines of distinction between Bush and Kerry become plain. There is no doubt in my mind that John Kerry is a patriotic American who loves his country. I do not care to rehash his service in Vietnam, nor his varying degrees of fealty to the uniform of the United States. I don’t have to. He has said and done much to put the voter on alert when asking the question: Will John Kerry do whatever it takes to see this war through to its end?

John Kerry’s Senate record shows a willingness to put America’s security and intelligence on the back burner and avoid conflict at nearly any cost. Throughout his twenty years in the Senate, Kerry instead typified a progressive’s love of government entitlements and social engineering. His conduct and speech during this campaign has been one of the most erratic trips through policy that a politician has ever attempted. He has literally been on every side of every issue, and none so flagrantly as Iraq and the war on terror.

This does not make Kerry any less American than anyone else. But it does make him inherently anti-war, anti-security, and politically opportunistic. Hence the many positions he has held regarding issues like Iraq, terrorism, or even the Patriot Act.

It is not only Senator Kerry’s record that voters should consider, but his more recent behavior of the past year that he has demonstrated in his run for the presidency.

President Bush, it can be said, has demonstrated the willingness and desire to see this war carried out until who knows when? This is not the wars of our fathers and grandfathers. There are no borders or uniforms, or emperors to signal surrender. There are only Islamic madmen who will gladly kill you as soon as look at you.

In his four years in office, three of them at war, Bush has defended what is dearest to all true Americans, and that is our homeland. Though the vocal minority of Bush-haters would have you think otherwise, it has never mattered to this president what political party you belonged to, or whether you liked him or not. He has fought for you, because it is what a commander in chief does.

In truth, the election is about our lives. It is not about the economy, or healthcare, or stem cell research. All of those issues fell by the wayside when the Twin Towers fell on the west side of Manhattan.

Those issues will always be there for future elections, but the war is here and now, and all else can only pale in comparison when the choice is life or death.

On Tuesday, November 2, Americans will decide two things: First, they will decide if America is still part of a post-September 11 world, and then they will decide who will lead America in its defense.

The time for choosing is upon us, and may God grant that we, as a nation, chose wisely.
For me, it will be George W. Bush.

###

Vincent Fiore is a small business owner and is an active "Citizen Politician" for the GOP. He currently contributes commentary to several political web sites on a weekly basis, and occasionally has had his commentary posted on NewsMax.com.

ANWAR004@AOL.COM