It's not hard at all. He's for the war if the voters he's courting support it and against it if they aren't. He voted against a war with UN support, but claims it was needed for this one. He voted for authorization but claims he was dupped, yet ignores the fact that many others including most in his own party believed as Bush did. He claims he has great plans, but they're nothing but already failed Clinton policies. He claims he would have gotten Osama, but doesn't address the constraints Bush faced in trying to find him. Easy boast, impossible to prove or disprove, and he hasn't even made a real try at backing it up. Kerry claims to be an alliance builder yet insults those we have while courting ones who have never been reliable or worth much when they did help. France has been an unreliable backstabbing ally for decades. Kerry's fondness for French opinion alone should cause grave concern.

Real reasons for doubt Chris, which you wiull no doubt ignore once again and attack Bush instead. I really get that Bush has faults Chris. I've argued against his environmental and economic policies myself as well as mistakes in Iraq, but you don't solve a problem of limited competance by replacing it with utter incompetance.

Fear can overrule reason and we need to be on guard against it. What I object to is the way you make your comments as if it's wrong to fear another 911. It most certainly is not and anyone who doesn't is either callous stupid or both.

Regards,
Mark