« Why I can't vote for John Kerry | Main | It's going to be a long night »

Jay Tea announces his endorsement

I know you've all been waiting with breathless anticipation for me to finally get off the fence and give my endorsement for President of the United States. After much consideration and soul-searching, I've decided to cast my vote for President George W. Bush.

(Note: This is an expanded version of my "why I support President Bush" entry over at Blogging of The Presidency)

In ascending order of importance:

On the subject of domestic and social issues, I find myself disagreeing with President Bush. For just a few examples, I think he's wrong on the issues of abortion, stem-cell research, and gay marriage. But I also believe that he has derived his positions from sincere beliefs and ethical principles, and that is something I can respect. Also, Bush at his core seems to say that a lot of these issues should be left up to the state legislatures, which are traditionally more receptive to the wishes of the people, and that's somewhere I can agree with him.

One of the things we've lost lately that I mourn most is the ability to disagree without being disagreeable. I am willing to reasonably discuss those issues, but the chances of having reasonable discussions on major issues is getting more and more difficult.

A lot of people talk about the economy, arguing whether it's getting better or worse, and under whom will it do better. I have absolutely no education and training in economics, but I've noticed that whenever you get two economists together, you end up with at least three opinions. So I look at the tangibles of the economy -- how I'm doing, how people I see are doing, and how businesses I see are doing. Personally, I'm a hell of a lot better off financially than I was in 2000. My friends are almost universally doing better as well. My employer is in the business-support field, and we're doing better than ever. Finally, the businesses that we work with are, for the most part, doing better and better. So when having to choose between someone who has governed while I've benefited and promises to keep taxes lower versus someone who promises to raise taxes, I'm gonna vote for the first guy.

Finally, on the issue of security, I have to again back President Bush. Al Qaeda declared war on us back in 1993, and for nearly his entire term President Clinton treated it as a crmininal matter. He threw police and lawyers at them (when he could be bothered), and it failed so spectacularly that Al Qaeda were enboldened to keep attacking -- our embassies in Africa, the near-sinking of the USS Cole, and finally the 9/11 attacks. After that, Bush finally realized that you fight wars with warriors and unleashed the mightiest force the world has ever seen -- the United States armed forces. Two terrorist-hosting and terrorist-enabling nations, Afghanistan and Iraq, were broken and are beign rebuilt. A third such nation, Libya, had a "come-to-Jesus" moment and switched sides faster than the Soviet Union in World War II, handing over its previously-unknown Weapons of Mass Destruction program and ratting out many of those it had previously supported. Iran is crumbling, suffering from enormous pressures from within (its own dissenters) and without (having massive US forces to both the east and west). North Korea is getting more and more rattled, desperately trying to balance threats and demands before its own starving populace either rises up or dies out. Saudi Arabia is realizing that decades of exporting its troublemakers is starting to come back and bite it on the ass, and frantically trying to shore up its monarchic thugocracy before it falls to either Islamic fanaticism or democratic reforms. Syria is jumping at the slightest hint that it might have to face the consequences from either the US or Israel for its long-standing backing of terrorists and occupation of Lebanon.

And, most significantly, there has not been a single significant terrorist attack within the United States since 9/11.

The founding fathers were incredibly wise men. The Declaration of Independence outlines certain unalienable rights, and lists as examples "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." That order was not chosen for stylistic reasons, but listed in order of priority. One cannot pursue happiness if one is not free, and one cannot be free if one is not alive. I trust George W. Bush to preserve my Life and my Liberty so I can properly argue with him and his supporters about allowing me to not only Pursue my Happiness, but perhaps even attain it.

J.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Jay Tea announces his endorsement:

» RAR's World linked with Is it the Right Time for an Experiment?

Comments (4)

The economy is terrible. So... (Below threshold)

The economy is terrible. So bad I spent $5,000 out of my own pocket to start a business in photography because, apparently when people no longer have jobs or have lower income, they spend an inordinate amount of money on wedding and child photography.

Oh, I had thought about something in the construction industry too because our poor economy apparently forces people to buy houses like crazy.

/end sarcasm

Our economy grew in the las... (Below threshold)
Jim:

Our economy grew in the last quarter by 3.7%. The French and German economies grew an estimated
0.008%. And these freaking nutjob Democrats want to emulate these EuroTrash economies with their high taxes and Socialist systems. And the news media treats our enormous economic growth as if it were the depression. These are the mental dwarfs of the Fifth Estate. God save us from them on November 2.

You disagree with Bush on s... (Below threshold)
Greg D:

You disagree with Bush on stem cells. Why?

1: There are no restrictions on using non-human embryonic stem cells for research.

2: You get your cells from the same species you're doing the research on.

3: We are incredibly ignorant about how to use stem cells (of all types). (Note: people have been doing research for 5+ years without any useful results in humans. If there really was immedate therapeutic potential here, drug companies would be funding research into it.)

Therefore:

4: There is no reason for the US Government to be funding human embryonic stem cell research. We need a lot of animal studies so we can figure out the basic science. Until that's done, "scientists" pushing for human embryonic stem cell research are most likely snake-oil salesmen.

Glad to read this, Jay Tea.... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Glad to read this, Jay Tea. You had me worried for a while, there.

~;-D

I read that *other blog* and stopped when I got to the point that Wizbang was/is described as "a right wing blog." Ho-hum.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy