WHY JOHN KERRY IS BAD FOR AMERICA
10/8/2004
By Dan Tetzlaff

Do me a favor: before you vote this fall, set aside at least 15 minutes to think...logically. Millions of people will cast their votes for John Kerry simply because they don't want to check the box next to Bush's name. Prior to seeing the ballot, thousands won't even KNOW John Kerry's name. These people have an unfounded disposition against President Bush simply because he is a Republican. (We all know how the national media treats Republicans.)

Plus, how could ANYONE vote for someone who the evil, drug-addicted Rush Limbaugh could support. Everyone knows that he is just a racist scumbag devoid of all logic. </sarcasm>

Before you vote, read this article. You will be exposed to the truth, supported by facts and logic--not the usual rhetoric supported by emotion. You will realize why George W. Bush is on the right side of every issue, both foreign and domestic.

The Minimum Wage
Democratic Senator John Kerry, if elected President of the USA, would raise the minimum wage nearly $2 per hour to $7.00 per hour. This move would have devastating effects on small-town USA and therefore, our economy as a whole.

First of all, small businesses employ and pay the salaries of 50% of all private sector employees in this country. These small businesses include fast-food restaurants, ice-cream shops, and boutiques. Most of these businesses cannot afford to pay their employees much more than the current minimum wage. Mandating that all businesses in this country pay a higher minimum wage will have many negative side-effects.

Businesses who cannot afford to pay higher wages will either a) permanently lay-off employees, b) raise retail prices--nullifying the increase in wages and leading to inflation, or c) go out of business. The Democratic policy of raising minimum wage will only hurt our economy. It is another classic example of feel-good liberal philosophy designed to keep the people dependant on the system.

Tax Cuts, Democratic Philosophy
Moreover, repealing the tax cuts on “people” making over $200,000 per year, as John Kerry stated he would do, will also have severe negative side-effects. First of all, this would apply to small businesses as well. Having less money will only encourage the businesses to out-source even more jobs to countries where tax rates aren’t ridiculously high.

Also, there is a strong sense of irony in today's Democratic platform. Despite wanting to repeal some of President Bush's tax cuts, John Kerry claims he will keep most of them. The Democrats running for re-election all around the country gernerally also support Bush's tax cuts. Why? Because the tax cuts WORK! The Democrats realize that the tax cuts work, and they realize that the vast majority of people WANT tax cuts. The Democrats cannot win an election if they plan on raising taxes.

Everywhere you turn, Democrats are running as Republicans. They are campaigning for fiscal responsibility, which is NOT an attribute of liberalism. What does this say about the Democratic party? It clearly is not in touch with the people. But do not be fooled; Democrats only want power. They will promise to keep tax cuts and say anything else necessary to win an election. But as soon as they win office, they will spend and spend and spend and spend and spend (see Hillary Clinton.)

Democratic Senator Zel Miller of Georgia put it best when giving the keynote-adress at the [sic] Republican Convention in September, 2004: “The truth of what today's Democratic Party has become is an enclave of elites paying lip service to middle-class values.” Do you really think that if John Kerry is elected that he will be fiscally responsible? Especially with his universal health care plan (see below) that could cost several TRILLION dollars??

Jobs / Employment
Democrats say that over the past four years, “the Bush Administration” has lost three million jobs. What they FAIL to mention, however, is that “the Bush Administration” has gained millions of jobs! In fact, “the Bush Administration” added 1.9 million jobs in the last 13 months alone! [Source: bls.gov] Furthermore, during the 1990's, the media was ecstatic about the low 5.6% unemployment rate. I find it funny how they refuse to report that as of September 2004, the unemployment rate in this country is now at 5.4%. Yet somehow, the economy is “worse” than it was under Clinton.

Employment is transient; people change jobs all the time. People get laid off and then re-employed by someone else all the time! For the Democrats to say that Bush has “lost three million jobs” and not mention the jobs GAINED is absolutely ridiculous. For the media to not realize this or report on it is just sickening.

Health Care
The Democratic vision for universal health care is also a farce. First off, importing drugs from Canada and other countries would have detrimental side-effects. It only takes a minimal amount of thinking and logic to look under the surface. The reason that prescription drugs cost so much is because the same companies that make the drugs do drug research. Research is not free! Research is very, very expensive. If we stopped buying drugs from American companies, they would not be able to fund their research, and fewer drugs would be developed. Also, the R&D jobs, in America, would be lost. Is this worth saving 15% on drugs? Democrats claim to put children first. But eliminating R&D does NOT put children first.

Secondly, America already has the world’s BEST health care system. The socialist system that John Kerry endorses has been tried all over Europe and in Canada. Try getting decent health care in Canada; it won’t happen. If you have a problem, you have to wait months for treatment. You can’t choose your doctor. All the decisions are left up to the government. Remember when Bill Clinton had to go in for Heart Surgery in September? Had he lived in Canada, he would still be waiting for that surgery. The same applies to injuries as well--such as broken bones--and every other subset of health care.

Moreover, John Kerry has stated that 45 million people in America do not have health insurance. This is a borderline complete lie. The way the Kerry campaign did their research is this: if a single person goes ONE day in a calendar year without insurance--and 364 days WITH insurance--that person is considered to be WITHOUT health insurance by the Kerry campaign. Enough said.

Terrorism
While all of the above domestic issues are important and favor Bush, they don’t hold any water to the important issue: Terrorism.

Ask yourself: Which leader, Bush or Kerry, would fight stronger against Terrorism?
Ask yourself: Which leader would the Terrorists prefer to hold the Presidency?
Ask yourself: Which leader supports the military, both fiscally and emotionally?

Would you really feel safer if “President Kerry” was in control of our military and foreign policy? Do you even KNOW what his foreign policy would be? He hasn’t said. At least not consistently. The most he has said is that he will build stronger alliances. Really? France and Germany already stated that even with Kerry as President, they still wouldn’t help out in Iraq. Good; I don’t WANT France and Germany helping us. Do you really think they would be--or could be--even marginally effective? Moreover, while Kerry says he will build stronger alliances, he desires bilateral talks with North Korea. That is a complete contradiction. John Kerry does not stand for anything and cannot be trusted.

No wonder half of all Kerry “supporters” actually hate him—but hate Bush more.

Most Bush haters complain that we left Afghanistan to go fight in Iraq. This couldn't be further from the truth. Do these people really think that the current President is incompetent? Or do they just think our armed forces are inept? We are the most powerful nation on Earth (this is something they aren’t happy about either) and we have the power to fight in two places at one time. Not ONE soldier was pulled out of Afghanistan and moved to Iraq. Not ONE resource. This myth has been thrown out there by liberals and supported by the media. It is a disgrace.

Kerry has a 20-year record of cutting defense, including weapons and aircraft and tanks and helicopters and body armor. He has called our current mission “the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time.” This, despite these statements:

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -John Kerry, Oct. 9, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." -John Kerry, Jan. 23. 2003

And he actually claims that he does not flip-flop! I guess that must depend on how you define the word “flip.”

John Kerry would destroy the moral of our troops. His policies would be soft on terror and therefore invite terrorism. I don’t want my President to be soft on terror. I don’t want my President to be “the anti-war candidate.” I don’t want my President to be ineffective and indecisive. And I really hope you don’t either.

As a whole, liberalism is a flawed philosophy that is detrimental to our country. As much as John Kerry pretends to be a conservative Republican, as hard as he tries to emulate President George W. Bush, he is NOT. He is a liberal at his core. His domestic policies will hurt small businesses and hard-working Americans. His philosophy will make people more dependant on the system (the government), and discourage people from trying to excel. And most importantly, John Kerry always has been, and always will be soft on terror. And you know it.
.

Copyright 2004, Daniel Tetzlaff
tetzlafd@msoe.edu

Article Source: http://www.machiningconcepts.com/dan/election/dan.html
Disclaimer: This article is not affiliated with Machining Concepts, Inc. in any way whatsoever.