For the second time
in recent days the world has been shocked
by a surprise
political endorsement. The New York Times - against all prior indications
- has chosen to endorse liberal Democrat challanger John Kerry in his bid for the Presidency. I suppose we should expect to see a slight
bias in favor of Kerry in NYTs articles in the coming two weeks as opposed to their previously fair and unbiased
Newspapers with a bit more sense than the NYTS, such as the Chicago Tribune, have picked the better qualified, better suited to win the war on terror, pro-democracy, pro-small business, pro-privitisation, anti-big government candidate, George W. Bush.
The Chichago Tribune, in their Endorsement of President Bush, wrote:
There is much the current president could have done differently over the last four years. ... But for his resoluteness on the defining challenge of our age — a resoluteness John Kerry has not been able to demonstrate — the Chicago Tribune urges the re-election of George W. Bush as president of the United States.
I think that is a fair endorsement. George Bush has not been a perfect president. We should not expect perfection from any man. But foreign policy and the war on terror are the most important issues to America. Kerry is unfit to take on either task. Kerry's solution to foreign policy is groveling before a Europe run by France and a UN run by criminals.