Sunday, October 17, 2004

ENDORSEMENTS FOR PRESIDENT BUSH


Chicago Tribune: This country's paramount issue, though, remains the threat to its national security. John Kerry has been a discerning critic of where Bush has erred. But Kerry's message--a more restrained assault on global threats, earnest comfort with the international community's noble inaction--suggests what many voters sense: After 20 years in the Senate, the moral certitude Kerry once displayed has evaporated. There is no landmark Kennedy-Kerry Education Act, no Kerry-Frist Health Bill. Today's Kerry is more about plans and process than solutions. He is better suited to analysis than to action. He has not delivered a compelling blueprint for change. For three years, Bush has kept Americans, and their government, focused--effectively--on this nation's security. The experience, dating from Sept. 11, 2001, has readied him for the next four years, a period that could prove as pivotal in this nation's history as were the four years of World War II. That demonstrated ability, and that crucible of experience, argue for the re-election of President George W. Bush. He has the steadfastness, and the strength, to execute the one mission no American generation has ever failed.

Denver Rocky Mountain News: The Bush Doctrine, as some have called his admittedly ambitious design, has been refined since 9/11 but remains based upon a few key principles: The U.S. reserves the right to take pre-emptive military action against terrorists wherever they dwell, and against the regimes that harbor or encourage them. Americans need not wait for another massive attack on their soil before they act. ...

(Kerry) was for many years quite simply wrong about America's successful strategy in the Cold War, opposing such critical decisions as deploying medium-range missiles in Europe and countering Marxist insurgencies. He opposed many of the weapons systems used effectively in Afghanistan and Iraq. And despite his mantra about the need for international coalitions, when he was presented with the broad coalition assembled for the Gulf War, he still opposed military action. ...

Given such a record, it is likely a Kerry administration would have difficulty even recognizing a gathering storm, let alone moving aggressively to neutralize it...

The president's ideal of an "ownership society" is no mere slogan. It is reflected in his embrace of health-savings accounts and self-directed pension investments for younger workers, as well as in his support of tax, regulatory and (usually) trade policies that promote growth and an entrepreneurial culture. ...

Throughout his career, Kerry has rarely displayed sustained interest in promoting dynamic growth of the sort that is the main hope for those at the bottom of the economic ladder...

The question is which candidate's vision is more likely to make us safer, freer and more prosperous than his rival's. For us, the answer is George W. Bush.


San Antonio Express: The events of Sept. 11, 2001, not only shaped the first Bush term but also have defined this year's presidential race. That's because the first question people must, and will, ask themselves as they enter the voting booth is who is better prepared to lead the international war on terror.
Although President Bush appears unable to define or admit his mistakes of the past four years, he surely has made them. ...

But he has not hesitated or faltered in the war on terror. He led the fight to clear out the terrorist nest in Afghanistan and, although work remains, three years later that nation is on the road to democracy after national elections.
Based on intelligence that led to a bipartisan resolve to remove Saddam Hussein from Iraq, Bush moved forward there as well. ...

Although his opponents now second-guess him and his administration on that decision, they supported it at the time. ...

The Bush administration is more likely to remain resolute on the war in Iraq than would an administration headed by his opponent, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. The vision of a free democratic Iraq to counter Islamic extremism and dictatorships is worth that resolve.


The New Hampshire Union Leader: President George W. Bush deserves re-election on Nov. 2 for many reasons, the most important being the need for his continued leadership in the global fight against Islamist terrorism. ...

President Bush’s doctrine of pre-emption was an insightful and needed change in American foreign policy after Sept. 11, but his opponent does not believe in it. Resumption of a pre-9/11 mindset in the White House would run the risk of giving cover to terrorists and rogue regimes who seek to aid each other in a war against Western civilization. This is not a risk we want to see America take. ...

While the President loses points on some domestic issues, he scores big on others. He has the right ideas on taxes, Social Security and health insurance. Without President Bush’s tax cuts, the economic downturn that began under President Clinton would have lasted longer and been more pronounced. Sen. John Kerry, readers might remember, voted against those tax cuts. ...

On social issues, the President also wins. John Kerry says he respects pro-life Americans, yet he wants to force them to pay for abortions and embryonic stem cell research. He says he is against same-sex marriage, yet he would do nothing to stop it. ...

On Nov. 2, we will vote for President Bush without hesitation. As the rest of the region goes for Sen. Kerry on Election Day, we hope Granite Staters will again display their famous independence by voting for President Bush and reminding the rest of the country that New Hampshire remains the most sensible state in New England.

The Arizona Republic: George W. Bush, whose decision following Sept. 11, 2001, to take the war on terrorism beyond America's borders became the defining choice of his presidency, is the necessary choice to move Iraq toward stability and modernity. Baghdad may not have been the fulcrum of terrorism before the U.S. overthrow of Saddam Hussein. But it is now. ...

It is on that ground that the war - and the peace - must be won.

And it is on that ground that The Arizona Republic recommends the re-election of George W. Bush as president of the United States. ...

We can only guess where a Kerry presidency will lead. Anti-war activists choose to believe he will find a way to bring the troops home quickly. Internationalists choose to believe he will prevail upon the leaders of Europe, who so viscerally opposed ousting Saddam, to help rebuild that nation. Isolationists opt to believe he will abandon the concept of "war" altogether and pursue terrorism as would a prosecutor chasing down criminals. ...

It is not credible that a man who has derided nations like Great Britain, Australia and Poland as the "coalition of the bribed and the coerced" can step forward to lead that or any group of nations in Iraq. It is not credible that a man who has decried events in Iraq as the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place can set that war on the right path. Contempt is not a plan...


Dallas Morning News: This newspaper has seen the Texas Republican in action since his first days on the gubernatorial trail. Though he has stumbled and fallen at times, Mr. Bush has always risen to fight the next round. It's called conviction. It's called sticking. It's called guts. The challenges of these dramatic days demand an American president with guts. As Mr. Bush told his convention, "You know where I stand."

We do, and we wish we knew where John Kerry stood. To be honest, we wish John Kerry knew where John Kerry stood. The senator has been more clear about his positions lately, particularly on Iraq. But his record of vacillation cannot be overcome in a single campaign. What's more, aside from indulging in the fantasy that he can persuade the Europeans to contribute to the Iraq effort, Mr. Kerry's Iraq policy is not substantively different from Mr. Bush's. The national security stakes are far too high to risk a return to the indecision of the Carter years. ...

We have also seen Mr. Bush preach compassion to a party that historically hasn't rallied to the cause of the immigrant in South Texas or the student stuck in a failing school. Government can be a force for good, Mr. Bush tells his supporters. Republicans normally don't talk that way. This one does, and he walks the walk (his landmark education and Medicare reform bills, for example). America is better for it, too, despite Mr. Bush's tacking too far to the right on certain divisive social issues. ...

Mr. Bush, unlike Mr. Kerry, grasps the true nature of this war. In the words of historian Victor Davis Hanson, "We really are in a war for our very survival to stop those who would kill us and to alter the landscape that produced them."

The nation can count on Mr. Bush to hang tough, just like Ronald Reagan during the worst moments of the Cold War. And as Mr. Reagan did in his second term, Mr. Bush may be able to leverage his strength through creative diplomacy, using it to create a more peaceful and ordered world. ...

The world is, and will continue to be, a dangerous place, and national security will continue to be our overriding issue. This is not the time for America to go wobbly. This is not the time for Americans to abandon their president.

You have a right to your own opinions - You do not have a right to your own facts!