Ron Demarest – 10/22/04

This page was last updated on October 23, 2004.

Don’t vote based on fear; Ron Demarest; Beaver County Times; October 22, 2004.

We haven’t had an anti-Bush letter from Mr. Demarest since mid-August.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Fear should not be the basis on which we decide what is truly the most important election in a generation, especially the fear of making a desperately needed change in troubling times.

“President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are doing their best to gin up the fear factor.”

[RWC] Republicans are using the fear factor? Who’s pushing the baseless claim of a draft? Who’s pushing the baseless claim that President Bush wants to kill Socialist Security? Who’s trying to convince minorities that Republicans want to take away their right to vote? The list goes on and on.

“On the issue of terrorism, they forgot the rule that in any war the object is to unite your friends and divide your enemies.

“With their diversionary occupation of Iraq, they did the opposite to tragic effect that has only begun to play itself out.”

[RWC] What is it with the anti-Bush crowd? They ignore the 40+ countries supporting our efforts in Iraq and instead choose to focus on the few countries (read: France and Germany) that don’t. Why would France count, but not Australia or Italy? Why would Germany count, but not Poland or the U.K.?

“During the Iraq war, al-Qaida spread like a cancer to more than 60 countries, and the international will and cooperation needed to fight it diminished with America’s reputation in the world.”

[RWC] Does Mr. Demarest expect us to believe al-Qaida was isolated in a couple of countries until March 2003? Can Mr. Demarest support this sentence with provable facts?

“U.S. Sen. John Kerry recognizes this while Bush is in deep and arrogant denial.

“Young people should not be fooled by Bush’s soothing assurance that there will be no draft.”

[RWC] Why are Democrats so enamored of the draft? The only people who have expressed a desire for a draft has been Democrats. The two service bills introduced as a political stunt in January 2003 were written and sponsored solely by Democrats. When Republicans finally called the Democrat bluff, the House version of the bill was defeated 402-2. Even the bill’s author, Charles Rangel (D-NY) voted against it. The only two reps who voted for the bill? You guessed it, two Democrats, Murtha of Pennsylvania and Stark of California.

President Bush has said repeatedly he does not want a draft and so have VP Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. Even if President Bush wanted a draft, there’s no support for a draft in Congress and we can’t have a draft without authorization from Congress.

Finally, there’s no need for a draft. The Pentagon has met or exceeded its enlistment and re-enlistment goals the past two years.

The draft issue is simply a baseless scare tactic dreamed up by desperate Democrats hoping to scare young voters into voting against President Bush.

“Since the final Iraq WMD report, the president has said that possession of these kinds of weapons is not necessary to justify war against a rogue state and that merely the intent to acquire them is enough.”

[RWC] I’d like to see the quote if it exists, and the context.

“There is so much at stake. Our area’s economy has suffered so much from the sort of outsourcing Bush still defends. Seniors cannot import cheaper drugs from Canada because of the administrations [sic] deal with pharmaceutical companies.”

[RWC] Our area’s problems are rooted in Harrisburg, not Washington, DC. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated only 2.5% of “lost” jobs were attributable to outsourcing. Even so, there has been a net increase in jobs since President Bush took office.

What deal with pharmaceutical companies? I personally have no problem with importing drugs from Canada, but you are kidding yourself if you believe Canada would permit widespread exports of drugs to the United States. There is no way pharmaceutical companies will allow Canada to become a government price controlled cut rate supplier to the United States. Drug companies would simply restrict sales to the level required to meet Canadian needs. Because there’s no way Canada will let its citizens go without drugs to supply U.S. customers, Canada would likely ban exports to the United States.

Consider this excerpt from an AP article: “Canadians must stop Americans from using Internet pharmacies to raid its medicine chest or face a drug shortage, a coalition of Canadian groups representing seniors, pharmacies and patients has warned. The groups, claiming to represent 10 million Canadians, or about one-third the population, called on the Canadian government Monday to ban prescription drug exports. They argue that Canada cannot afford to address U.S. drug shortages and soaring prescription costs with its own stock, which are often considerably cheaper for Americans because of government price controls.”

“Our basic right of privacy and control of the Supreme Court is up for grabs.”

[RWC] Regarding privacy, what is Mr. Demarest talking about? Regarding the Supreme Court, folks in Mr. Demarest’s camp claim the Supreme Court is already in conservative hands. Will you guys make up your mind?

“The need to exercise our right to vote has never been clearer in our lifetime.”

[RWC] Amen.