VDH against Bush

VDH unintentionally makes the case against George Delano:

Had Lincoln lost the 1864 vote, a victorious General McClellan would have settled for an American continent divided, with slavery intact. Without Woodrow Wilson’s reelection in 1916 — opposed by the isolationists — Western Europe would have lost millions only to be trampled by Prussian militarism. Franklin Roosevelt’s interventionism saved liberal democracy. And without the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan and his unpopular agenda for remaking the military, the Soviet Union might still be subsidizing global murder.

This election marks a similar crossroads in our history. We are presented with two radically different candidates with profound disagreements about how to conduct a historic worldwide war.

By the thousand dark young of Shub-Niggurath, VDH inadvertantly makes a better case against George Delano than I ever have. He pulls no punches in equating a vote for Bush with voting for Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt. If that’s not enough to scare you straight into the Peroutka camp and the Constitution Party, you may be many things, but you’re not a conservative by any meaningful definition of the word.