On Tuesday I will support the candidate whom I believe is best suited to handle foreign policy and national security. All other issues — taxes, health care, stem-cell research — are secondary.
President Bush claims that he is the candidate best suited for leading the country during wartime, yet his principle reasons for invading Iraq — weapons of mass destruction and links to al Qaeda — have virtually evaporated. His argument that we have gone to war to enforce UN mandates against Iraq, while legally plausible, has never had the ring of authenticity.
Sen. Kerry claims that he is the candidate best equipped for internationalizing the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Only an expanded coalition (read: France) will have legitimacy in the eyes of Iraqis and the rest of the world. This may be true, but what if they will not come, as almost assuredly they will not? What then? Despite Sen. Kerry’s best efforts to present himself as a war candidate, his heart does not seem to be in it.
I support the only candidate who is both pro-war and has had the candor to say what needs to be said. My vote goes to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain.