My pointing out that he has plenty of money is not a non-sequitor in this instance. It shows that the reason given is not a valid one.

It is all tactics. What you spend now defines what you spend later. Your assertion that you know how much they want/need to spend and when they want/need to spend it is silly. You aren't qualified. Neither am I. Anyway it has nothing to do with a statement they made a long time ago. I only pointed out what they said.

The fact that the press has been smoothing Kerry's road for him is self-evident. Pretending I'm imagining it is not a valid argument either. Labeling something "self-evident" isn't much of an arguement, either either.

Thought you were talking about his Guard duty, not the flight to the carrier. Not my fault you're ambiguous. Yes. If I again was not explicit enough then: I admit that the mistaken communication was all my fault.

The entire article you linked to was on that specific subject. Maybe a bit off topic on my part. Woops. My fault. I didn't read it past the part where it looked like Kerry campaigned on the 18th.

What Kerry says is what he thinks he needs to say to get elected. Period. Wake up and smell the politics! What on earth do you think Bush fills up his stump speaches with???

Whatever else you might say about Bush ... and it's fairly obvious that most of it is not driven by polls. One of those partisan breaks with reality: "Your guy follows the polls. My guy doesn't."

Whatever else you might say about Bush, you know what you're getting after his first four years... Exactly.