Four More Years Of Bush, A Truly Frightening Prospect

Dan Murphy

If on the evening of November 2, 2004, George W. Bush has amassed 270 electoral votes, he will serve as our president for four more years. What would a second Bush term look like? Could it possibly be any worse than the first term? Absolutely. You see, as a lame duck president, Bush would have no accountability to voters in a second term. With this the case, he would certainly dust off elements of his extreme right wing agenda that he has yet to implement.

Iraq – Could a second term in Iraq be any worse than the first for George W. Bush? Yes, in fact it could be catastrophically worse. Our military is undermanned, trying to defeat an enemy they cannot see. Unfortunately, our president can’t see that we’ve made mistakes, he told us so in the second presidential debate. The fact is, since our invasion and occupation, Iraq has become a breeding ground for terror. The president says he will not budge from the January 2005 date Iraq is set to have elections, however this is not wise. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has already admitted that some regions of Iraq would not be able to vote due to heavy violence. For a democracy to take hold, citizens must feel safe and secure. A second Bush term in Iraq will result in more of the same we’ve had to endure the last year and a half: more violence, more chaos, and more casualties. Does John Kerry have the all the answers? No, but Bush’s poor credibility in the world will bring nothing other than failure in Iraq.

Environment – The first Bush term did a good job wiping out a lot of the environmental regulations on logging, oil production, global warming, and others. In a second term, the president will continue to march in exactly the wrong direction on environmental policy. We need to preserve our forests. I enjoy breathing the clean air here in upstate New York. Ask the residents of Houston, Los Angeles, or Newark if they enjoy breathing in their air. They most likely do not. We desperately need more regulations to protect our environment. After all, this administration doesn’t believe in the science of global warming! How is that sound policy? I can’t bear to think what Bush would do to our air, our water, our forests and our beaches if given four more years.

Energy – Again the Bush administration is heading directly in the wrong direction in energy policy. Four more years of cupcake deals to Halliburton and tax breaks for oil companies will result if George W. Bush is re-elected. How can we expect a former oilman to lessen our dependence on Saudi oil? We should be investing in alternative forms of energy, yet our administration keeps to the mantra of “drill, drill and drill.” Certainly another Bush administration means more money for oil companies and less progress from energy independence.

Abortion – In the debates, Bush was vague on abortion, never explicitly denouncing it, but certainly not supporting it either. Bottom-line, if Bush is re-elected, at least one Supreme Court justice is bound to die. When this occurs, a political battle of monumental proportions will erupt between Democrats and Republicans. Right-wingers have wanted to do away with Roe v. Wade for years. If they have the opportunity to change the Court, what makes you think they won’t act on it? A second Bush administration will mean that a woman’s right to choose will be seriously endangered. Abortion will no longer be, as President Clinton put it, “safe, legal, and rare.” Do we want a president so beholden to the radical religious right that he would set aside the views of the majority of Americans, who believe in some form of legalized abortion, and implement his own right wing agenda? You make the call. Do four more years of Bush still sound like fun? We may have illegal abortion, a chaotic Iraq, polluted environment and a backwards energy policy. Are these good policies? You make the choice on November 2.