I think Bush has cornered the market on smarminess. If you look up "smarmy" in the dictionary, I'm pretty sure they show a picture of him with one of those idiotic smirks of his!

And as far as opportunism goes, the things that were done in his behalf in Florida far exceed opportunistic, as does the speed at which he went to war in Iraq.

Bush beats Kerry on both smarminess and opportunism.


I disagree. Upon his return from Vietnam he resigned his commission and accepted a discharge which was other than honorable due to his moral and political convictions. Clearly not something which was self serving or benefitted him in any way. Any discharge other than honorable is a disadvantage to one seeking employment or contemplating a career in politics. Yet he felt so strongly about his convictions that he took a stand even if doing so meant he would have to accept his discharge on unfavorable terms. That clearly demonstrates a "core" and someone who stands by his convictions, which made him unpopular with many then, and obviously still does so today.

Bush has a core too. A rotten one. The only convictions he has revolve around power, profits, and a narrow, ethnocentric, fundamentalist religious agenda. The ignorant things that come out of his mouth must cause his handlers to absolutely shudder! I'll be posting some prime examples. Stay tuned!


He hasn't back stabbed anyone. His testimony in 1971 was not fabricated, it was factual. Those things were certainly going on in Vietnam. He opposed the war and did something about it. He wanted to convince the government to get out, and spare thousands of other brave young men from senselessly having to go there and die needlessly.

How did he personally gain in any way from his testimony? How could he have gained from any attempts to convince the government to get out of Vietnam? What motivation would he have had to lie or aid the North Vietnamese? Now who is paranoid and delusional?

Many people of good conscience protested the Vietnam War, including veterans. It was not cowardly or cowardice, he had already served in combat and had no need to fear being sent back. He simply had seen first hand what was going on and believed it was wrong. You and others say he has no convictions, but when he demonstrates them you condemn him for it, because they are not the convictions you want him to have. You are certainly free to disagree with him, but you can't say he had no convictions. His convictions cost him his well earned and well deserved honorable discharge.

He's a murderer for killing in combat, but Bush is a patriot for sending our military to kill innocent Iraqi civilians. How do you reconcile that?

If the North Vietnamese twisted Kerry's testimony to use against POW's that is unfortunate. But he cannot be held responsible for their actions when he was merely offering eye witness testimony designed to get us out of Vietnam and save thousands of other young men from being killed in action, or suffering the same fate of those POW's for a war that was never worth the sacrifices they made. The truth sometimes hurts, but it's still the truth. It still has to be spoken. Ultimately, the truth WILL set us free, as it did in Vietnam.

Treason is a serious charge to be levied against a combat veteran and a U.S. Senator. Have you ever heard of "Libel", or "Slander", or "Defamation of Character"?


Bush was a lazy, goldbricking, slacker in the ANG, who couldn't even show up for duty, and got away with it. Anyone else would have been locked up.

Bush and his cronies are guilty of election fraud. They belong in jail.

Bush is a war criminal in Iraq. 100,000 civilian casualties in a war that had no justification.

Bush belongs in jail.

Get your issues fixed and vote for Kerry on Tuesday!