A Word From A Fellow (Conservative) American: A Trace of Truth

note: The following was written by a guest author and submitted to B&U. Views and beliefs expressed in this piece are not necessarily those of the management and staff of Balanced and Unbiased, I just thought it might be nice to bring in some different opinions once and a while.

Today, November 14, 2006, truth my have been found. President Bush's denouncing of Iran and their psychotic president may have a base. Traces of plutonium and enriched uranium have been found. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated that the Iranian nuclear power program is nearing completion. The traces of possible nuclear weapons material were detected by the I.A.E.A. They also have acknowledged that Iran refuses to cooperate with the U.N. John Bolton said that these two new discoveries "both demonstrate the urgency for the Security Council to act on Iran."

This probably won't have an affect on the international community just like the preceding evidence brought to light. America is not really taking a hard stand on Iran, the U.N. will be the ones to do anything about it, but even blatant disregard for its resolutions and orders won't rouse them into action. What needs to be done is sanctions on Iran, and if they don't cooperate, more sanctions. The next step would be, say a 48 hour deadline to let inspectors search the country for nukes. If they don't cooperate with that, bomb them.

This could turn into a failure for the west if nothing is done. Bush is on the right track, but now the terrorists and democrats have scared him into losing his balls. He is content to let the U.N. girls deal with it. What the world needs is a U.S. led NATO coalition to invade and pacify the country, then on to North Korea.

Alex B.

Liberty Throws Off Its Shackles

Finally, last Tuesday, a majority of Americans told George Bush and his party what they could do with their lies and right wing, partisan politics. The Democrats have swept the House, and have a majority in the Senate. I think the White House still doesn't know what happened.

Let me talk first about Don Rumsfeld. For all the talk about not wanting to inject a political decision into the final days of the election, wanting to show the troops that decisions aren't made about them based on politics, and it's just time for a new direction, Rumsfeld resigned because he had to. Had Republicans hung on to even one house of Congress, Bush would've never let him leave, seeing as how he's kept him on through everything else. But now that Democrats will have a lot more authority in Washington, it makes everybody involved on W's side look less weak if they do things on their own terms, because it would've only been a matter of time before Democrats kicked Donald out. I think American soldiers should be as pissed off as the rest of us, because the whole reason they're stuck in Iraq is a string of political decisions made by George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld. Bush was right about one thing, though, it is time for a change, and it has been for quite some time. I just think it's sad that changes weren't made until W realized that the game was up.

Enough with that now. For the first time in years, America will be on it's way to progress. We've got lots to do before the '08 elections. I hope that one of the first will be a raise in the minimum wage. Of course, we can hope that opportunities will come up to remove some recently added executive powers and privileges, and all sorts of improvements that the people could only dream of a few weeks ago.

You may have noticed that even though Democrats are the victors, there are no snubs of the Republicans, and there is a distinct atmosphere of cooperation and bipartisanship. This is very different from recent years, when Republicans were in power. Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those the days when the extremist part of the party advanced it's own agenda, and prevented pretty much anything else for leaving the Congress? Weren't those the days when Congress made almost no notable accomplishments domestically, and allowed our president to lead us into nightmare in Iraq?

I say, it's about time somebody tried to find some middle ground. Democrats will try to work in a bipartisan manner, but the appropriate people will be held accountablefor the last 6 years. And if some republican wing nut should try to block us, he can't do a thing. I'm really hopeful for America when I look ahead now, because for once Congress has people in charge who care about you and me.

God bless America.

Why Does Everybody Hate John Kerry?

Maybe you've heard, maybe you haven't, but John Kerry has once again made headlines for something he probably regrets now. While speaking in California, he cracked a joke which (although he definitely didn't mean it to) seemed to imply that the men and women of our armed forces are stupid. That's not the end, he was reluctant to apoligize, and didn't do so for 24 hours. Now it's headline news and the only spot of bad news for Democrats coming into the election. Of course, I'd like to kick John Kerry right now, along with all the reporters who won't stop talking about his lapse of judgement. But cut him some slack! Almost any other Democrat could've said the same thing and it wouldn't have gotten this kind of attention. So today I'll be examing why everybody seems to hate John Kerry.

While I'm frustrated, let me say that John Kerry doesn't hate our troops. He served honorably in the Vietnam war, no matter what republicans say, and he supports service men and women just as much as you and I. What I don't understand is why republicans can't let the 2004 election go. The most common rebuttal for my criticisms of the president or even republicans in general is something about how at least we're better off than we would be with a flip-flopping injury faker. What does that have to do with anything? Your side won, and has failed to accomplish anything, so you continue to call the opponent in an election two years ago names that have absolutely no bearing on anything now that the election has been decided. I think it should be noted here that another common talking point among my conservative peers is how Clinton had no morals, so George Bush is good. Again, that's completely irrelevant, just let it go.

Having shown that I support John Kerry as much as the next democratic senator, I do have to admit that his public image is very succeptible to spin from the republicans. With this reality in consideration, I have a plan. What if Kerry switched his party affiliation to independent. He'd still get elected as long as he wants in his state what with his incumbancy and everybody knowing his name, and nothing he does or says could be used by the republicans against the democrats, because Kerry wouldn't be a democrat. He would still be a democrat in all but name, free to vote the party line, support causes, and he can take enough shots and jabs at the white house to drive them nuts. But Bush and Rush Limbaugh can't spin it and misconstrue it to mean that democrats hate our troops, not to mention America in general (not that they won't try for a while).

The good news though, is that I heard a guy on the news this morning saying that this has hardly affected Democrats as we close in on election day. I guess I'm done for now. Just remember that this election isn't about John Kerry (no matter how many republicans are trying to relive 2004), it's about George W. Bush's complete mismanagement of America and the War on Terror, and his refusal to change anything for the better.