John Kerry can't stop mouthing off about the so-called "politics of division." During the third presidential debate, Kerry blamed public polarization on President Bush: "I regret to say that the president who called himself a uniter, not a divider, is now presiding over the most divided America in the recent memory of our country." He also claimed that he'd be able to bring Americans together. "We have to change that. And as president, I am committed to changing that."
Too bad Kerry's a liar. In the most divisive presidential campaign in American history, Kerry and the party for which he stands have set out to break all bonds, to rend young and old, rich and poor, black and white, all for the sake of political power. The Democrats don't want a united America. They want an America bitterly divided, so that they can put on their faux "healing" hats and pretend that if elected, they will bridge all gaps.
There are plenty of issues about which Americans can honestly disagree. The two major political parties in this country are vastly different breeds, despite what third-party radicals say. The Democrats are foreign-policy appeasers and United Nations patsies who fear ascendant American power. Republicans are foreign-policy hawks, American interest-first unilateralists if necessary, who wish to maximize American global dominance.
The Democrats are big-government economic liberals who pledge a balanced budget but can only reach it by raising taxes. The Republicans are big spenders, too, but largely due to the pressures of a closely divided Congress; ideally, they want to balance the budget by cutting government spending and government taxation.
The Democrats are social liberals who wish to validate the gay activist agenda, forward abortion and devaluate traditional morality in schools and in government. The Republicans are social conservatives who prize traditional morality above all else.
So there's a good deal about which to argue. But for John Kerry and his Democratic ilk, arguing the issues isn't conducive to victory. Because, really, who wants a socially liberal, fiscally spendthrift, militarily weak party leading this country?