Comparing U.S. President George Bush with Winston Churchill may seem a stretch. Yet there's a parallel -- not with Churchill of the war years, when he was the "free" world's most admired leader, but with Churchill of the 1930s when he stood alone, warning about the rise of Nazism.

Then, pacifism was rampant in Britain and Europe. Hitler's aggression was rationalized by wishful thinking. Peace at any price.

Except for Churchill. He began warning that the Nazis must be stopped when they occupied the Rhineland in 1936. He urged an alliance of Britain, France and the Soviet Union to stop Hitler's expansion. He was called a warmonger, an enemy of peace, reviled in print and in speeches. Few stood with him.

History has proven Churchill right.

It wasn’t too long ago that the DNC folks were giddily predicting Democrat majorities for the House and Senate this November. The darkest gloom has replaced the giddiness. It’s dawned on them that Kerry is singlehandedly sinking their hopes.

Media reports that the "insurgency" is gaining ground are no more genuine than Dan Rather's memos on President Bush's National Guard service.

Contrary to vague news reports of a "widening conflict," an analysis of where casualties are being inflicted indicates the conflict is still restricted largely to the Sunni triangle areas where it has always been. Two thirds of the country and three quarters of the population are relatively peaceful.

"You may hear analysts and prognosticators on CNN, ABC and the like talking about how bleak the situation is here in Iraq, but from where I sit, it's looking significantly better now than when I got here," says a US Marine. "It is very demoralizing for us here in uniform to read and hear such negativity in our press. It is fodder for our enemies to use against us and against the vast majority of Iraqis who want their new government to succeed."

Are you listening, Senator Kerry?

Jack Kennedy would "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe." For Kennedy: "Only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it."

It is ironic that in this time and in this place, the direct descendent of those words, and the virile passions they convey, can be found coming from the mouth and heart not of the Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, but of his opponent, the Texas Republican George W. Bush.

Yesterday, addressing the den of jackals, thieves, petty dictators and other international flotsam -- which goes by the name of the United Nations General Assembly -- President Bush echoed the brave, necessary words of the once Prince of Camelot:

This is the full Introduction to John Fund’s new book, Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy . A friend of mine for many years, John is on the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal and writes the WSJ’s Political Diary column. You’ve seen him often on Fox News - it’s always enjoyable to see John rhetorically slap Alan Colmes around.

John has written a very important book, and it could not be more timely. The Democrats are masters at stealing elections, and new rules regarding such things as “provisional ballots” and mass absentee voter fraud give them more opportunities than ever. John’s book is sobering and frightening. The Democrats have gone around the bend this year with rage. Their ends-justifies-the-means Marxist morality - as exhibited by Dan Ra^ther claiming forgeries are fine if they contain a “core truth” - gives them the rationale to commit whatever fraud necessary to “win.” Please read John’s Intro - and please buy John’s book! -JW

Our nation may be on the brink of repeating the 2000 Florida election debacle, but this time in several states, with allegations of voter fraud, intimidation and manipulation of voting machines added to the generalized chaos that sent our last presidential contest into overtime. There is still time to reduce the chance of another electoral meltdown, both this year and in future years. But this will not happen unless we acknowledge that the United States has a haphazard, fraud-prone election system befitting an emerging Third World country rather than the world's leading democracy.

How do you think the sanctimonious people at TV's "60 Minutes" would portray a company charged by the FCC with "serious indecency violations," that made expensive settlements with employees and others because of injuries related to asbestos and other hazardous material exposures, underfunded its employee pension, is legally accused of securities violations, employs those who widely distributed forged documents in an effort to destroy political opponents, failed to dismiss or discipline employees who violated the company code of conduct, owned offshore enterprises that paid little or no U.S. corporate tax, and operated in and/or dealt with countries harboring terrorists?

The company that engaged in all of these practices is Viacom, parent company of CBS, which produces "60 Minutes."

The folks at "60 Minutes" remind me of the preacher who damns the sinners every Sunday, but then is caught in the brothel.