of Bush. (Not that the accusation surprises me in the least.) Second, imo, John Kerry is a total p.o.s. The guy has been hungry for power since he was in his early 20s. All of his plans are typical campaign promises: guaranteeing results with no economic basis whatsoever. The man is STILL perpetuating the myth that women make 75 cents on the dollar of what men do for the same job. For women with the same education and the same experience, the figure is around 98 cents, not 75.

I couldn't watch the debates. I tried to, but listening to either made me cringe. How in the world you put your faith in Kerry is beyond me, but then again, you're admittedly biased.   Bush may come off as an idiot, but when presented with the choice (with no alternatives), I'll side with the dunce over the liar.

As far as Saddam and Iraq goes, I'm not the one with blinders on looking solely at Bin Laden as if we were at war with him, that if we got Osama, everything would be hunky-dory. We're at war with Islam. Since neither the Administration nor the press nor the supporters nor the detractors are saying this, I can only wonder how it is that I'm blindly following the leader. I've criticized Bush on MANY of his actions. Naturally, all of these criticisms are ignored. Either I'm fully a Democrat, or I'm one of "you guys" -- a Republican. It's only (a few) Democrats on this board that lump me in with Republicans, no matter how many times I side with the Democrats. No Republican here has displayed such audacious ignorance.

Iraq is a small fish in a much larger pond. It was a tactical move. Check out the linked map. It was no accident we invaded Iraq over any other country there. We disagree on this and always will. This war is FAR from over. Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise for decades throughout the Middle East. It sure as hell didn't end with our invasion, but -- for the first time -- we showed we were willing to take the fight to their land. They thought and think we're cowards. Why? Because we're INFIDELS. That is a religious word, further proof of what this war is all about. Was Saddam an immediate threat? Probably not, and I don't really care. He was taking steps to become one and bribing everyone in sight. He wasn't an Islamic fundamentalist, but he was a tyrant who sure as heck wasn't trying to limit their cause. I still cannot believe how much credit you and others give him for not having WMDs, even if they were "only" chemical weapons. There was nothing Bush was going to do to make you or Native happy. Why? Because he wasn't Gore. Yet I'm the one who's  and biased. I really don't understand how doing nothing (referred to as containment) and trying to establish alliances (with whom? NEVER ANSWERED. France, Germany, Russia, China = bribed, bribed, bribed, bribed) while still doing nothing would've ever accomplished anything. We've been talking for decades. Result? The Islamic fundamentalists concluded we were cowards. What would more talk have done? Nothing. Great plan. Reminds me of the Gators' defense this year. The countries in the Middle East are highly volatile. We need to ensure that they implode rather than explode. Iran is ripe for a civil war. Their "government" is an out and out joke, yet their citizenry is anything but. Our presence in Iraq -- right next door -- is stirring a pot that otherwise would just burn.

There's a fight that's been raging for decades. We stood by and did nothing despite numerous attacks against us. Regardless of who is President, I think we should be over there, and I have tremendous respect for the soldiers that are there fighting. For those that don't want to be, I have little sympathy. They chose to enter the military of their own free will.

Right smack in the middle