Which presidential candidate’s foreign policy does this sound most like?

“We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analyzing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a program would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators.”

“It has always seemed to me that in dealing with foreign countries we do not give ourselves a chance of success unless we try to understand their mentality, which is not always the same as our own.”

These quotations are from neither of our two presidential candidates but rather from a famous English leader. I’ll give you a hint. I got the idea for this post from Thomas Sowell’s latest column (dated August 26, 2004).

Ok, it’s not original, but it’s still a very good reason.

Chief justice William Rehnquist–Age 78
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor–Age 73
Justice John Paul Stevens–Age 83

Conservative presidents do not have a very good record in the past 50 years of appointing true conservatives to the Supreme Court. However, liberal Democrats have a very good record of appointing liberal justices to that court. So, worst case, it’s a choice between a chance of getting a truly conservative Supreme Court justice or the near-certainty of getting yet another liberal appointed to the Court. And I actually believe that the words of the Constitution, although not on par with Holy Scripture, mean something. I think that the only way to change the Constitution is to amend it, not to read it as a “living document” that means anything some judge thinks it ought to mean. So I’ll be voting for GWB who might have a small chance of appointing judges to the bench who believe in interpreting the Constitution to mean what it actually says.

From a speech by George W. Bush at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN on July 12, 2004:

To overcome the dangers of our time, America is also taking a new approach in the world. We’re determined to challenge new threats, not ignore them, or simply wait for future tragedy. We’re helping to build a hopeful future in hopeless places, instead of allowing troubled regions to remain in despair and explode in violence. Our goal is a lasting, democratic peace, in which free nations are free from the threat of sudden terror. Our strategy for peace has three commitments: First, we are defending the peace by taking the fight to the enemy. We will confront them overseas so we do not have to confront them here at home

Three years ago, the nation of Afghanistan was the home base of al Qaeda, a country ruled by the Taliban, one of the most backward and brutal regimes of modern history. Schooling was denied girls. Women were whipped in the streets and executed in a sports stadium. Millions lived in fear. With protection from the Taliban, al Qaeda and its associates trained, indoctrinated, and sent forth thousands of killers to set up terror cells in dozens of countries, including our own.

Today, Afghanistan is a world away from the nightmare of the Taliban. That country has a good and just President. Boys and girls are being educated. Many refugees have returned home to rebuild their country, and a presidential election is scheduled for this fall. The terror camps are closed and the Afghan government is helping us to hunt the Taliban and terrorists in remote regions. Today, because we acted to liberate Afghanistan, a threat has been removed, and the American people are safer.

Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. We removed a declared enemy of America, who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder, and could have passed that capability to terrorists bent on acquiring them. In the world after September the 11th, that was a risk we could not afford to take.

Does anyone believe that John Kerry would have the ability or the courage to protect the United States of America by going to war if necessary? Or would he stand by and watch helplessly and wring his hands while other nations harbored terrorists and stockpiled weapons? Even if Kerry would defend the U.S., wouldn’t the terrorists be more likely to believe that he is weak and unwilling to fight and then attack us? If George W. Bush warns another Saddam Hussein that we will not tolerate terrorists who plot to kill us and destroy our freedom, will they not believe him?

What famous American was born on this day in 1946 and made these statements?

America stands for liberty, for the pursuit of happiness and for the unalienable right for life. This right to life cannot be granted or denied by government because it does not come from government, it comes from the Creator of life.

The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable – and it is not carried forward by our power alone. We can trust in that greater power Who guides the unfolding of the years. And in all that is to come, we can know that His purposes are just and true.

Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world; it is God’s gift to humanity

I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom.

The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them.

To those of you who received honours, awards and distinctions, I say well done. And to the C students, I say you, too, can be president of the United States.

When you turn your heart and your life over to Christ, when you accept Christ as the savior, it changes your heart.

Use power to help people. For we are given power not to advance our own purposes nor to make a great show in the world, nor a name. There is but one just use of power and it is to serve people.

Happy Birthday, Mr. President. And may God bless you and God bless America.

I got this from WORLD magazine’s blog:
“The President has ordered that the flags flying at half-staff, in mourning for the death of Ronald Reagan, be raised today. That would be two days earlier than is customary. President Reagan died on June 5, so normally the flag would be at half-staff until July 5. But the White House decided that it would honor the memory of President Reagan to have the flags flying high on Independence Day.”

It seems approppriate to raise the flag high for Independence Day. I think Ronald Reagan would approve.

Wow, how beautiful! And how long can anyone continue to maintain that abortions only remove a piece of “tissue” from the mother’s womb? If an eighteen week old baby can open its eyes, when will American pro-abortionists open theirs? God is using technology to force them to see.

I got this little piece of information from Norma Bruce’s blog, Collecting My Thoughts:

Fahrenheit 9/11 will be shown at ALA in the Auditorium at the Convention Center, Sunday night, June 27, at 10 pm, two days after it opens nationwide. There will be a $10 donation that will go to ALA’s efforts in the areas of the First Amendment, Intellectual Freedom, and the struggle against the USA PATRIOT Act.

And now you know why I never joined the American Library Association when I was a librarian (in another life). Also it was too expensive.

Boston Globe, April 20, 2004:
The latest inside account of the Bush administration has provided fresh fodder for John F. Kerry’s campaign, with the presumptive Democratic nominee yesterday condemning the president for reportedly allowing the Saudis to maintain high gasoline prices until just before the fall election, when they would be cut to boost the US economy.
Washington Post, May 19, 2004:
Sen. John F. Kerry attacked President Bush on Tuesday for failing to take action to prevent a steep rise in gasoline prices, which hit an average of $2 a gallon this week, and for supporting policies that have enhanced corporations and wealthy Americans at the expense of middle-class families.

Let me see if I understand this. If gasoline prices go down before the election in November, it will be because Bush cut a deal with his Saudi friends in order to win the election. If prices remain high, it’s Bush’s fault because he wants to make his oil business friends even richer. So either way, Bush is the bad guy, and Kerry would propose, what?
Kerry outlined several steps that he said would help hold down gasoline prices, including diverting oil going into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and said the president has failed to do anything serious to stem the price rise.

Of course, we should deplete our emergency supplies of oil because the world is now a safe place, and we don’t need those old “strategic reserves” anyway–or rather, we need them now to bring down gasoline priices for the summer. And Kerry wants me to vote for him for president?