Michael Jackson TalkRadio Content

he president's supporters admit that we are faced with enormous problems and that there appears to be no end in sight to the warfare in Iraq and rising tensions elsewhere. That, they claim, is a major reason for staying with the known quantity; not "changing horses in mid-stream." I challenge that logic and hope that the unity we had following the horrendous attack of 9-11 can be reclaimed. We are at war with terrorist radicals and we need a united front, but with the policies of George Bush we have become, not just polarized as a people here at home, but rejected by much of the world. If Kerry could win the White House and, as seems most likely, the Republicans retain control of both the House and Senate, we might well restore the checks and balances envisioned by the nation's founders. Looking beyond Iraq to the worldwide war on terrorism, Kerry and Bush have not really taken dissimilar approaches, but I can't help but believe that, as the candidate's running mate, Sen.John Edwards, has said "Kerry will do it smarter."

One of the surprisingly large number of newspapers currently editorializing on behalf of a Kerry/Edwards presidency, the Daily news of the San Fernando Valley, in a lead editorial, reminded us of that famous warning from Abraham Lincoln that has never in our lifetime seemed more appropriate, that a house divided against itself, cannot stand. They said, what many of us feel, that "Under Bush America has grown divided. New leadership is our best bet for bringing the country back together and forging unity that we cannot win the war without."

If the view of the publishers of newspapers in this country was what determined the outcome of the presidential election, Sen.John Kerry, the Democratic candidate would win hands down. Over the weekend John F. Kerry picked up the endorsement of 17 newspapers that had selected to support George W.Bush for president in 2000. And overall many more dailies are supporting Kerry over Bush, but I don't think they make much impact on the voters. Maybe in local races, but generally not on the national scene.

Generally, the choice we face is between two candidates with very different views of governing and completely different opinions about how this country should exercise its power in this world. Kerry knows that our influence and power depend on America's credibility around the globe. The preemptive war policy doesn't work; we've tried it, and if the incumbent is returned to the White House - where to next?

If we are looking for real answers to real issues; from Medicare to Social Security costs, international and national economic policies, surely Kerry offers hope and a better choice.

I find Mr.Bush's complete denial of mistakes and reluctance to alter his policies, worrying. I find Mr.Bush's vision of spreading democracy through this war in Iraq a complete failure that has only helped to swell the ranks of the Fundamentalists who hate us.

As the Financial Times of London put it, editorially, "The US needs allies in the struggle against terrorism but Bush's crusading moralism has alienated the rest of the world."

John Kerry is a better choice for the US president.

Change horses or drown!