I don't see how Kerry, who is deep in the pocket of special interests, would be much of an improvement for Democrats. And Bush has gone hog-wild on domestic spending...you'd think that would please liberals. It has puzzled his supporters, at best.

Nevertheless, getting rid of Saddam was the best thing we could have done. We have removed a major source of funding for terrorism, eliminated a serious possiblity for some very ugly weapons to get into the hands of people who have no compunctions about using them, established a foothold for freedom in the Middle East, vastly improved the lives of the Iraqi people, and shown our enemies that there are consequences for attacking the U.S. and that we have the courage not to back down in the face of terror.

What puzzles me most is why our Congressional leaders on both sides are not more openly concerned about what happened to those weapons? We know they were there and it behooves us to solve the mystery of what happened to them, not just sit around and conjecture. If even a small number of them are floating around the Middle East, we have reason to be very, very concerned indeed. But that is OT.

Unfortunately, this campaign will be more about a battle for control and power than about principle, conservative or liberal. The negativity, hate, and smear-mongering issuing forth from the Democratic Party shows their sense of desperation at the prospect of losing power, nothing more, nothing less. Kerry says we can't even look at his voting record in the Senate to decide if he'd be a good President! What are we supposed to make of that? The one virtue of Howard Dean was that at least he said what he thought. You knew where he was coming from, even if most of his platform was execrable. Kerry is indeed an "empty suit" as one pundit put it.