Posted on Sun, Oct. 17, 2004
We recommend . . .
President of the United States: John Kerry
When the Herald recommended the election of George W. Bush as president of the United States four years ago, we lauded his record in Texas as a consensus builder and expressed confidence in his ability to unite the country after four years of bitter partisanship. We liked his slogan, "A uniter, not a divider," and criticized opponent Al Gore's role as point man for Democrats' mean-spiritedness.
How poorly we understood George W. Bush in 2000. We could not imagine the possibility that, just four years later, Bush would have done just what we feared of Gore - that the United States would barely be on speaking terms with some of its staunchest allies, and that America would be reviled around the world as a bullying, imperialist superpower. How far we have fallen from the bright fiscal forecast in 2000, with surpluses that offered the promise of debt paydown now replaced with a staggering $500 billion annual deficit and the national debt projected to exceed $9 trillion by 2010.
As for Bush being a uniter, sadly, the nation is more polarized than it has been since the 1960s. Bush's administration is notable for its lack of transparency, its intolerance of dissent, its refusal to admit mistakes. Under Bush's leadership and Republican control, Congress has become a mean-spirited, partisan body where the vice president is praised for cursing an opposition senator on the Senate floor. The "compassionate conservative" president has people at outdoor rallies arrested for hoisting an opposition sign.
<snip>
A needed change
And so we come to John Kerry. We believe the Democratic nominee offers America a clear choice for a badly needed change in direction. Kerry brings to the job of president more than 20 years of Senate leadership, a personal knowledge of war and hope for a new approach to end the Iraqi nightmare and address the nation's domestic problems.
Kerry makes those high priorities. He offers a solid plan for making health care more affordable to more citizens, for dealing with the deficit, for preserving the future of Social Security and Medicare, for raising education standards, for stopping the drain of jobs overseas and for encouraging economic growth. On these fronts Bush also appears to be in denial, painting rosy scenarios to people deeply worried about their jobs.
The Bush campaign has sought to smear Kerry at every turn, engaging in the most despicable campaign tactics to demean his honorable war service and twist his legislative record.
<snip>
The Herald Editorial Board's recommendation of Kerry was a difficult decision, and it was not unanimous. It comes with the stipulation that Kerry stick to his promises to support our troops, to secure the homeland, to protect the middle class from tax increases while reining in federal spending, to choose open-minded Supreme Court nominees if vacancies occur, and to strengthen the economy and protect the job base. Certainly there is a degree of risk in choosing one who is untried. But then, we face that uncertainty with every first-term president. At least we have the benefit of four years of Bush's administration to help us make the choice. It comes down to this simple question famously asked by Ronald Reagan in 1980: Are you better off today than you were four years ago?
The answer, clearly, is no. Ultimately, that is why we recommend John Kerry as president of the United States in the Nov. 2 election.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/opinion/9939989.htm