March 16, 2004 - From the very beginning of this election cycle it has been clear, the divide between the American people with respect to our political culture is wider than it was for the 2000 election. Ever since the controversial Supreme Court decision that concluded George W. Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election, what should have been the final word for all to accept, there have been those from the party that preaches tolerance for all who have embraced intolerance at a level seldom seen.

For a brief moment after the September 11th attacks it almost seemed as though our country left the divisiveness of political narcissism behind and came together as a nation, standing together in the face of adversity, strong of heart, committed to bringing justice to those who would spread fear and death while cloaked by the veil of terrorism, Americans one and all. It seemed the intolerant within the “tolerant party” had finally come to their senses realizing nothing can ever really be perfect. But with the ideological battle of semantics that commenced regarding the reasoning for removing a tyrannical dictator from power, whose radio stations played “Death To America” daily as he checked his “list of people to torture and murder today while cheating the UN in collusion with its leadership,” it became evident the intolerant were just hunkering down to weather the storm of national pride we were having.

Many have started to hear that this election is about more than two men from opposing parties. This statement couldn’t be more accurate. This election is about ideology. It is about the very course our country will take into the future. It is about our country’s identity and whether or not we will continue to be the greatest country on the face of the earth or whether we will elect ourselves into being the cash cow for a multicultural globalist society, a world community hell-bent on embracing socialism instead of democracy. Are we going to forfeit our sovereignty to become a globalist nation or are we going to embrace our identity, an identity that is the melting pot of the world? Are we going to bow to the internationalism of multiculturalism or hold dear the principles and ideals that have allowed us, throughout our history, to come to the aid of our now distant allies?

All the citizens of the world, even the most intolerant among the “tolerant party,” need to understand that the United States since her creation has been going through the melting-pot growing pains of the culture wars. We are constantly mixing foreign cultures together to create one people, Americans. The United States is the successful face of multiculturalism, we don’t need to embrace Europe’s version. Where Europe is starting to come together as one culture, where the Middle East is starting to see a transformation, the United States has been accomplishing this task all along, we have done it over our existence, through our periods of mass immigration that exist still today. We are already confronting the issues of social injustice, discrimination and embattled hatred. Where Europe would have us hold their hand as they go through their growing pains we simply must allow them to do so on their own as we continue to exist as a beacon of hope for them, nations undergoing their own metamorphosis.

Yes, this is an election that pits ideology against ideology: Traditionalism against secularism; capitalism against socialism; nationalism against globalism; security against terrorism and realism against extremism. The intolerant among the “tolerant party” would have us believe that globalism is the way of the future, as they stand blind to the fact that we are the definition of multiculturalism. It would be counter-productive to enter into a second stage of multiculturalism, a stage that is tantamount to socialism. The United States, with all that the intolerant can point to as being wrong, unjust and inequitable about it, has earned the right to sovereignty devoid of extremist global influence and socialistic compromise.

We are the greatest nation to see the face of the earth. We have come to the aid of more people in times of crisis around the world than any other society known to man. Some will call it arrogance but the truly insightful understand it to be confidence. And while there are those who claim the United States uses its power for narcissistic means it should be pointed out that every endeavor we have ever undertaken, including all aspects of the War on Terror, has combated totalitarian regimes, set people free and brought democracy to new lands both near and far.

While there will always be those who would rather engage in a battle of semantics over the catalyst for the battle for Iraq, a singular battle in the War on Terror, as opposed to admitting in common sense that a great evil has been cast out of the world and that a major battle between the forces of good and evil is now taking place half way around the world instead of in the streets of New York, we must always remember that in the end the United States has always honored the rights of those who would choose to spout their misguided and under informed rhetoric, even when they contend they are being oppressed. The fanatical and extreme have never been very bright, no matter where they come from.

So, I ask the voters, which would you rather have, a country that embodies the principles as set forth by our Fore Fathers, a country that stands unique among the nations of the world while it serves as a shining light for democracy, liberty and personal freedom? Or shall we join the globalist community of multiculturalism and erase any identity, any sovereignty that we have come to know? The choice is simple…that is unless you are into embracing the idea of global multiculturalism and being one of the intolerant among those of the “tolerant party.” Then you have to vote for John Kerry.

Main Page