Thursday, October 14, 2004
Thursday, October 14, 2004
We favor Bush, and here's why
By JOSEPH W. McQUAID
THIS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION is about many things, but it is mostly about Sept. 11, 2001, and the way in which George Bush has acted as commander-in-chief in leading this nation in the war on terror. He has done so forcefully, and with unwavering commitment, and he is clearly the better candidate to continue the job.
This newspaper was not impressed with the pre-9/11 George Bush. We don't think all his choices since then have been the wisest or best. But here is the key difference we see between Bush and John Kerry:
President Bush is doing what he thinks is best for this country out of conviction. Sen. Kerry is saying whatever he thinks will give him the best chance of winning.
That is why Kerry has changed his positions so many times. That is why Bush will not waver, even if it means losing. That is why we endorse President Bush and hope our readers will carefully consider him, as well.
An expanded endorsement
editorial ran in the New Hampshire Sunday News on Sunday, October
Bush for President:
His leadership is needed
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.
In response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President Bush did not lash out or rush to war. He built an international coalition to destroy the Taliban, then built another to remove Saddam Hussein from power if Hussein continued to defy United Nations resolutions demanding that he adhere to the terms of the cease fire that ended the 1991 Gulf War.
Hussein refused to comply with the ceasefire and subsequent resolutions. Given this and the multifaceted threat that numerous international intelligence agencies believed Hussein posed, President Bush convinced more than 30 other nations to join the United States in destroying the Hussein regime.
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.
Domestically, President Bush has been disappointing in some areas. He has spent far too much money, deepened federal involvement in education and acted to limit free speech by signing into law an unconstitutional “campaign finance reform” bill. Yet his opponent is for spending vastly larger sums, getting the federal government more deeply involved in education and other local and state matters, and further restricting free speech.
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.