Introduction

There are times when I get so frustrated with my fellow Americans that I just want to curl up in a little ball and scream, at the top of my lungs, "SHUT UP, SHUT UP, SHUT UP!!" That's usually accompanied by a strong desire to punch people in the face because they won't shut up. As satisfying as either option might be, though, I realize that neither one is really productive.

I've never heard anyone give a solid reason why I should vote for John Kerry. Very few of them can give me a single reason. Oh, plenty of them have reasons to vote against Bush, but for Kerry? That's a laugh. The best reason they can give to vote for John Kerry is "he can't be as bad as Bush." That leads to two questions: One, exactly how bad is George Bush as President, and Two, could Kerry be worse?

Reasons for Voting Against Bush

1.) Bush got us into an illegal war.

I shouldn't have to talk about this. Like the 380 tons of weaponry, the CBS memos, or John Kerry's accusations that Bush is going to have a draft, this accusation should have fizzled out almost immediately. I shouldn't be surprised, of course -- if those three memes spread like wildfire among the populace, there's no reason the accusation of an "illegal war" should have died out.

First, I'm not sure that the word "illegal" applies to nations. Illegal, according to Dictionary.com, means: Prohibited by law. There's no world government (and shouldn't be), so I'm not sure who passed these supposed laws. We are, of course, bound by treaties, but I'm not sure that a breach of treaty, even if one had been committed, is the same thing as "illegal."

Let's address the issue in question, though. In 1991, we went to war with Iraq, with the approval of the United Nations. That war was under a cease-fire for more than a decade -- a ceasefire that was constantly ignored by Saddam Hussein during his tyranny over the Iraqi people. Therefore, legally this war is just the completion of that one, and it's legal. Semantics, you might argue. That's fine -- Law is Semantics. It shouldn't be, but there are lots and lots of lawyers out there whose jobs depend on that fact. If the law weren't semantics, you and I could write our own contracts and deal with one another in good faith. Many lawyers exist solely for the opportunity to manipulate the loopholes that might be left in a contract. Law is semantics, and it's easy to use law to show that our perfectly legal war, started in 1991, is still going on today.

Now, let's address what is really meant when one talks about "illegal war." I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume that those who complain of the "illegal war" really mean "immoral war." (I suspect that what they mean is: "A war supported by conservatives," but that's just silly, and doesn't deserve a response. So, benefit of the doubt.)

Is the war in Iraq immoral? No. It was immoral to leave Saddam in charge in 1991, leaving him free to fill his mass graves. It was immoral to leave the Iraqi people under a tyrant who felt that rape was a legitimate form of punishment. It was immoral to leave Saddam Hussein in charge of a nation, where he could obtain hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of tons of explosives, which could easily have been handed over to the ghost-like terrorist organizations that would find ways to use them against us that would have made 9/11 look like a "slow news day."

"But we helped Saddam earlier. We are to blame." Well... yeah. We did help Saddam. I can't say it was the best decision, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't the worst one at the time, either. Sometimes (indeed, MOST times), you don't have the choice between best and not-best. You have a choice between bad and worse, and you make the bad decision, and you move on the best you can. That's life. Deal with it.

Kerry has, more-or-less, said that Hussein would still be in power if he had been the President. Given the Oil-for-Food scandal, chances are that sanctions would be lifted, and Iraq would've been rebuilding WMDs. Saddam would still have his hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives, and he would have been a grave threat to both us and Israel. Not directly, perhaps, but I have no doubts that he would have hesitated in handing weapons over to someone who'd use them against us.

2.) Bush screwed up the war in Iraq

I think it's really a bit early to be making accusations like this. Remember, just a few weeks into Afghanistan, when we were being told it was a horrible quagmire? They had an election a few weeks ago. Is the war in Iraq a bloody, horrible thing? Yes, but that's what war is. War isn't pretty. Mistakes will be made.

It's very, very easy for John Kerry to stand here today and tell us that George Bush made mistakes, and that he wouldn't have made them. Chances are, he's right. As mentioned above, he wouldn't have been there in the first place, and in the big picture, that mistake is much bigger than anything George Bush has done wrong in Iraq.

Despite Kerry's claims, this is nothing near as bad as The Bay of Pigs.

2a.) Bush lost 380 tons of explosives in Iraq

We still don't know exactly what happened, but the story as originally run obviously isn't true, so stop whining about it until more facts are known.

2b.) Bush went in alone.

As Bush said very well in the second debate, "You tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Silvio Berlusconi we're going alone. Tell Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland we're going alone. We've got 30 countries there. It denigrates an alliance to say we're going alone, to discount their sacrifices. You cannot lead an alliance if you say, you're going alone. And people listen. They're sacrificing with us."

We didn't take France. We didn't take Germany. We didn't take Russia. That doesn't mean we're alone. Kerry's doing everything he can to undermine "the coerced and the bribed," just so he can add "the bribed" who were taking money (See: Oil for Food Scandal) from IRAQ!!!

3.) Bush lied about WMDs

Bush had intelligence reports. He told us what those intelligence reports said. I honestly believe he told us what he believed to be true. The WMDs weren't (contrary to many claims) the only reason we went to war in Iraq, nor did the President say that Saddam was an imminent threat. In fact, he said we had to stop him before he became an imminent threat.

Meanwhile, Kerry's picked up the "missing explosives" story and ran with it, even while some of his advisors were saying "We don't know the facts yet." If he's willing to do it now, on obvious things, how much more willing will he be when he can hide the contradictory evidence under the veil of "Classified for National Security Reasons"?

Outright lies? Kerry's got those, too. Did he release all his records, or not? Either way, he's lied.

4.) Bush refuses to apologize about, well, anything.

I think he has good reason. (See the article at Tech Central Station titled "Apologize, George W. Bush!" for some of those.)

Speaking of apologizing, did Kerry apologize to the troops who were in Vietnam for his accusations against them in 1971? Did he apologize to the troops in Iraq for voting against the money they needed for equipment? Did he apologize for the scare tactics used in this campaign? Has he apologized, on behalf of the Democratic Party, for the rude and disgusting "retarded" poster, or for the racist political cartoons that his supporters have released starring Dr. Rice or Colin Powell? I know he wasn't personally involved, but he's supposed to be their leader, and it'd be a nice gesture, at the very least. Where are Kerry's apologies? Kerry insists that President Bush should say, "The Buck stops here." Why won't he accept the same responsibility?

5.) Bush ruined the economy.

The first question here is exactly how much influence a president has on the economy. The answer is "a lot less than some people think," but since presidents are more than willing to take praise when the economy is doing well, people also want them to take the blame.

Really, though, the economy isn't doing that poorly. The false boom in the 1990's, which was caused, in part, by the fast-growing tech industry. The crash of a large number of the "dot-bomb" companies, combined with September 11th and the ethical problems with Enron and others, all of these things led to a short recession, but we're on the way back up. This is just more scare-mongering from the Democrats.

6.) Bush opposes Gay Marriage.

Other than the amendment, the two candidates seem to have the same position. As far as the amendment goes, the basic gist of it (and I'll admit that I don't know that much about it) seems to be that Bush wants to stop activist judges in a few more liberal states from forcing the minority position on the rest of the nation. I don't support this amendment, but I would support a more general one that would stop judges from effectively writing their own laws, instead of just ruling on laws that the legislative branch passed.

Still, I'll grant that if this is the issue you're voting on, supporting Kerry over Bush makes sense (though you'd probably be better served by voting for Badnarik).

7.) Bush wants to take away abortion rights.

Bush opposes abortion because he believes unborn children are human beings and he doesn't like the idea of ending an innocent human life. Kerry believes the same thing, but supports abortion because... well, apparently, murder is okay if your faith tells you it's not murder. If nothing else, my support goes to Bush for this one, if only because he's consistent in what he believes.

Again, if you really think that this is that important (and you understand that there's a big difference between wanting an abortion because of rape or health risks and using abortion simply as after-the-fact birth control to avoid consequenes of your actions), it makes a little sense to vote Kerry over Bush, but Badnarik probably provides an even better choice for you.

8.) Bush has hurt our standing in the world.

Our standing in the world has been bad for a while, actually. We got some temporary pity (which looked like good will, but really wasn't) after 9/11, but "The World" quickly went back to where it was and continued down the path it had been going. The Reagan years are fairly fuzzy in my mind (I was 2 when he got elected. How much do you expect me to recall?), but it's my impression that during his presidency, a lot of the same accusations that're flying about now were thrown at him.

Besides, we still have allies. Granted, there are some very vocal people who hate us and use our current foreign policies against us, but we're far from being alone in the world.

A lot of the hatred for us around the world is, in my opinion, due to our distinction between "violent and protective" versus "violent and predatory." We see a difference between using bombs for the purpose of killing innocent people to prove a point and the incidental deaths of those who are killed by an attack on a legitimate target. We would, of course, rather that no one innocent ever died, but sometimes, sadly, collateral deaths are necessary.

Because we see the distinction and they don't, they oppose not only our policy in our War on Terror, but our policy re: Israel. This is what's causing some strife in the world, and if the situation arises where we have to do the right thing or the popular thing, then I'm proud to have a President who does the right thing. Kerry, on the other hand, seems determined to do the popular thing.

9.) Bush cut taxes on the rich.

Whine, whine, whine. Maybe Bush cut taxes on everyone, but the people who pay most get the most back. Did that occur to anyone?

FactCheck.org has an article about the "tax burden" issue here. The top 20% is still paying nearly 65% of taxes, so I really don't see why it's such a big issue.

Reasons for Voting For Kerry

I did admit there were a few people who had reasons to vote for Kerry. Let's look at those reasons, shall we?

1.) Kerry has a plan for [Insert your issue here].

You mean, he claims to have a plan. Have you seen any plans? I've seen lists of complaints, with claims that "I'll do better," with little to no explanation as to how he'll do better. That's not a plan. It's whining.

2.) Kerry will give me healthcare.

I've already discussed this here. Kerry's healthcare plan is questionable at best. The whole idea that less money goes into the system and more services come out is absurd, and I have to wonder if he's not planning to use tax money to shore it up. So, if I opt out, I'm still paying for a service I don't use.

3.) Kerry will get me some cheap drugs.

How?

3a.) Kerry will let me import cheap drugs from Canada.

Canadian officials have said no to this plan -- a country that has cheap drugs for 30,000,000 cannot possibly export enough drugs to cover 300,000,000 milliion here.

3b.) Kerry will work with legislators to artificially lower prices on drugs.

You might be interested to know that a similar plan went into effect with vaccines. In addition to no-fault liability lawsuits, this caused a lot of vaccine makers to decide it wasn't worth it, and led to the situation we're in right now, with a huge shortage of vaccines. With vaccines, that's tolerable (though not good), but imagine a sudden shortage of blood pressure medicine, or psychiatric drugs (which can cause very bad side effects if you quit them suddenly).

In the end, the free market may make some drugs very expensive for now, but the R&D that those high costs will eventually fund tends to be very beneficial for all of us. Letting the government meddle seems like a recipe for disaster.

Conclusion (Endorsement)

Given all of this, along with the added bonus that George W. Bush is (or at least appears to be -- I don't know his heart) a Christian man who takes his faith seriously, the editorial staff (i.e., me) of One Stack Mind is proud to give our (okay, my) endorsement this election season to George W. Bush for President of the United States of America.

-----

ADDENDUM:

While (for the reasons stated above) I pray, fervently, that it will be God's Will that George W. Bush will get re-elected, I'm forced to take a cue from La Shawn Barber, who said:

If the people want John Kerry, so be it. If he wins, it is God’s will. If Bush wins, it is God’s will. On election night, I’ll be praying that Bush’s re-election and Kerry’s defeat is God’s will. He may have other plans. I trust him.

I'll trust God to allow things to play out according to His plan. Where He leads, I'll follow. Even when I don't understand why things are being allowed to go the way they are.