Bush or Kerry? Chocolate or vanilla? Night or day?

The late, great columnist Murray Kempton said editorial writers were like partisan fighters who come down out of the hills after the battle and shoot the wounded. There is some truth to that, but I have a kinder, gentler simile in mind.

J.M. Barrie, the author of Peter Pan, used to ask children to sit with him in his box during performances of his famous play. After the curtain came down one night Barrie turned to the little boy he had invited and asked: "So what part did you like best?"

The little boy said, "The part I liked best was tearing the program into little bits and dropping them on the heads of the people below."

Last week I gave a short luncheon talk to a group of women administrators with the Houston Community College System. My assigned topic was "Campaign 2004 -- What role will women play," but that was just a ploy to attract a better class of audience. Because of the way the occasion ended, I'm not sure it worked.

After my talk, the group conducted a straw poll on the presidential race. The count was 12 for John Kerry, 11 for George W. Bush; one for Nader; and two undecided.

I was surprised that Bush did so well among women educators, but then Bush has the home state advantage. No doubt some of his supporters in the room viewed him as a sentimental favorite. Others really, really, really wanted another cut in the capital gains tax.

The vote for Nader obviously was cast by someone who wished Bush to have four more years but didn't want to be held responsible for the result.

The most puzzling, however, were the two undecideds. Texans have known Bush as an elected official for almost 10 years. If the election is a referendum on the incumbent, there is likely to be no decisive revelation concerning Bush's character and ability before November.

Voters weighing Kerry against Bush confront a stark choice. Bush offers all the qualities of a great U.S. leader: decisiveness, resolve and the occasional blunder. Kerry, according to the conventional folly, is the indecisive ditherer, the man who changes his mind back and forth.

One would think Kerry by nature would take a large share of the undecided vote. For the undecided voter, casting a ballot for the candidate who can't make up his mind would seem an irresistible act of self-indulgence, just as those who don't read much and mistrust intellectualism see something of themselves in Bush.

On a policy level, Bush and Kerry are like night and day. With some exceptions, Bush places the convenience of industry above environmental protection. Kerry, accused by the Bush campaign of being a flaming liberal, surely can be counted on to do the opposite.

Bush favors lower taxes and high federal deficits. Kerry wants higher social spending, higher taxes on the upper echelons of society and deficits lower than the record about to be set.

Bush, often through his running mate, Vice President Dick Cheney, vows he will make America safer than Kerry will. If necessary, Bush will wage pre-emptive war unrestrained by allies or the United Nations. Kerry says he will pursue multilateral arrangements to contain nuclear proliferation and sort out the mess in the Persian Gulf, because even a superpower can't go it alone.

Undecided voters living in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and other battleground states, strategists predict, will decide the election. I hope they enjoy the attention they are getting and will cast their votes without fear or doubt.

Gibbons is interim editor of the Chronicle opinion pages. (james.gibbons@chron.com)

****........It was Kerry's style that bothered people the most, suggesting that the senator may be saddled with
a negative public image similar to the one that plagued Gore in 2000, when many voters saw the vice president
as boring and stiff.

Those interviewed last week said Kerry came across as rich and affected, and seemed to say merely what he
thought people wanted to hear.

Stopped in a parking lot in Herculaneum, Mo., a half-hour south of St. Louis, Tom Nations and his wife
explained why they supported Clinton twice and would back his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, if she ever ran
for president, but won't vote for Kerry.

"I don't want the nation put in the hands of Kerry," said Nations, 50, a manager for a car dent-removal
company. Pressed for why, he paused before adding: "Kerry is just a speechmaking type. He just stands there
and is like, 'Four score ... ,' you know? I don't think he's prepared for what the country is going through."

His wife, Karen, a hairdresser, agreed. "I just want to feel safe and protected," she said. "Kerry, it's like he's
rehearsed in his speeches and guarded with what he says."

Several people said they would vote for the president as "the lesser of two evils."

"I like [Bush] less than I did then," said E. Keith Dean, 78, a Bush supporter in 2000, as he paid his lunch tab
at Jim's Steak and Spaghetti House in Huntington, W.Va.

But the president's criticism of Kerry as an untrustworthy politician seems to have stuck with Dean, a retired
architect: "I do think there's some validity to this, 'You can't trust what he says.' [Kerry] just changes from one
time to another. I don't have any confidence in him."

In the wooded hills of Braxton County, W.Va., where small farms dot the landscape along the Elk River, many
said they considered voting Democratic this time but lack faith in Kerry's ability to handle the country's
problems. Gore defeated Bush by just 190 votes here..........****

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.election13sep13,1,6569662.story?coll=bal-home-headlines

JOHN KERRY
CLICK HERE TO SIGN FORM 180

BUSH SIGNED FORM 180

WHAT ARE YOU HIDING?
WHAT IS YOUR SECRET?
WHAT DON'T YOU WANT
AMERICA AND THE PRESS TO KNOW?

E-Mail this story AND links to the media today.

John Kerry directly contributed to the lies of the anti war movement AND caused deaths and injuries
to US Military serving in Vietnam AND
directly caused deaths from injuries at home AND countless suicides because of his false testimony.

John Kerry is not fit to be elected dog catcher let alone President of the United States.
ANYONE who votes for Kerry AFTER knowing this data
is guilty of covering up John Kerry's war crimes!

John Kerry, director of the Vietnam Veterans against the War,
testified before special session the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
April 22, 1971

KERRY GAVE TESTIMONY BASED UPON FALSE INFORMATION
THAT KERRY KNEW AHEAD OF TIME TO BE FALSE!

September 6, 2004 -- **BREAKING** In Yesterday's Lies: Steve Pitkin and the Winter Soldiers, Scott Swett tells the story of a former VVAW member and participant in the Winter Soldier Investigation who states that John Kerry and others pressured him to give false testimony about American atrocities in Vietnam. After more than 33 years, Pitkin is the first Winter Soldier "witness" to file a legal affadavit regarding that event...

My name is Steve Pitkin, age 20, from Baltimore. I served with the 9th Division from May of '69 until I was airvaced in July of '69. I'll testify about the beating of civilians and enemy personnel, destruction of villages, indiscriminate use of artillery, the general racism and the attitude of the American GI toward the Vietnamese. I will also talk about some of the problems of the GIs toward one another and the hassle with officers.

-- Steve Pitkin, Winter Soldier Investigation, February 1, 1971.

E-Mail and/or fax these url's to EVERYONE ASAP! Kerry MUST be exposed NOW!
PUT PRESSURE ON THE MEDIA TO COVER THIS BEFORE NOV 2nd

Steve Pitkin Story

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=YesterdaysLies1

Steve Pitkin Affadavit, August 31, 2004

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=PitkinAff

Steve Pitkin DD-214

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/PitkinDD214.jpg

Steve Pitkin WSI testimony

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=PitkinWSI

Steve Pitkin WSI video clips -- February 1, 1971 (4:16, 1.6MB)

http://www.wintersoldier.com/video/pitkin2.wmv

John F. Kerry
Timeline of a traitor.
Click Here

http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html

Guide to Local Media
Locate media in your zip code, gives you links to YOUR local media with phone, e-mail etc info.

Free Internet Fax Service
Free E-Mail to Fax from your computer, just fill in form on page , they do the rest.
Make sure you enter fax # like this 12025551212 (no spaces or -)

Is the number you want them to SEND FREE FAX covered?

Complete list of areas they SEND FREE FAXES to

Kerry's disrespect in 1971 to USA Symbols Video

Windows Media .......... Real Player .......... Quick Time .......... AOL

Ramsey Clark to Join Panel for Saddam’s Defense
arabnews press release 25 August 2004
NOTE :
Ramsey Clark is pictured below with Kerry and
Vietnam phony vet Al Hubbard
Who was head of the
Vietnam Veterans Against the War movement.

Al Hubbard Sgt., 22 Troop Carrier Squadron Aug. ’65-June ’66
- Al Hubbard, proven fraud who never set foot in Viet Nam.
The only Vietnamese he ever met was
when he was collaborating with the North Vietnamese in Paris
on the American Communist Party's nickel.

John Kerry's explanation:
"He (Hubbard) simply exaggarated his particular position.
But nobody knew it at the time. And those things happen."

Free online version of
Kerry's "The New Soldier"
You can read it online right now.

Kerry hopes everyone
in the USA gets this book!

NEW:
“Without question,
we were held captive longer
because of the anti-war people,
the Kerrys, the Fondas and Haydens,
the names we knew over there -
they encouraged the enemy to hang on.”
Excerpt from “Stolen Honor” website
- Leo Thorsness
Former Vietnam POW
CLICK HERE

Jane Fonda tells the student audience at the Michigan State University in 1969:

"I would think that if you understood what communism was, you would hope,
you would pray on your knees, that we would someday become communist."

Joe Moore, Can Tho Airfield 550th Signal Company

Copy and paste the links to everyone you know.

Steve Pitkin Affadavit, August 31, 2004

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=PitkinAff

John F. Kerry Timeline of a traitor

http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html

Kerry's disrespect in 1971
to USA Symbols Video

Windows Media
http://swift3.he.net/~swift3/medals.wmv

Real Player
http://swift3.he.net/~swift3/medals.rm

Quick Time
http://swift3.he.net/~swift3/medals.mov

AOL
http://swift3.he.net/~swift3/medals.mpg

Send this url for the online "The New Soldier" version

http://ejsmithweb.com/fr/newsoldier/

Send this url for the Stolen Honor website

http://www.stolenhonor.com/

...but I have a kinder, gentler simile in mind. J.M. Barrie, the author of Peter Pan...

Well what follows in the Houston Commiecal sure is a fairy tale.

Last week I gave a short luncheon talk to a group of women administrators with the Houston Community College System. My assigned topic was "Campaign 2004 -- What role will women play," but that was just a ploy to attract a better class of audience. Because of the way the occasion ended, I'm not sure it worked.

Yeah, too many "dumb" Republican women showed up.

After my talk, the group conducted a straw poll on the presidential race. The count was 12 for John Kerry, 11 for George W. Bush; one for Nader; and two undecided. I was surprised that Bush did so well among women educators, but then Bush has the home state advantage. No doubt some of his supporters in the room viewed him as a sentimental favorite. Others really, really, really wanted another cut in the capital gains tax.

Cheap digs but okay, maybe he'll give both barrels to the Kerry supporters as well.

The vote for Nader obviously was cast by someone who wished Bush to have four more years but didn't want to be held responsible for the result.

Or maybe it was cast by someone who did not like President Bush but knew what a DISASTER John Kerry would be for America, the world, and most importantly the Democrat Party. Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis sure saw them staying out of the executive office. Maybe it was John Kerry's confession of committing war crimes. Maybe it was for his support of war on Iraq even without UN approval back in 1997 when Bill Clinton was president. No, the Houston Comical's editorial board feels that this voter "got it wrong" and chose the wrong person. Be sure to count this vote in the Kerry column when the recount is demanded.

Completely skipped needling the Kerry supporters. Maybe there were a couple extremists who wanted to be sure that they would still be able to kill their babies and proudly proclaim the act with a t-shirt. Maybe they voted for him because of sentimental reasons; they liked old tv shows like the Addams Family, The Munsters, and Mr. Ed.

The most puzzling, however, were the two undecideds. Texans have known Bush as an elected official for almost 10 years. If the election is a referendum on the incumbent, there is likely to be no decisive revelation concerning Bush's character and ability before November.

Again, maybe the Chron's editorial board can understand how there is some explanation for people to choose to vote in a party other than Democrat, let's see what follows:

Voters weighing Kerry against Bush confront a stark choice. Bush offers all the qualities of a great U.S. leader: decisiveness, resolve and the occasional blunder. Kerry, according to the conventional folly, is the indecisive ditherer, the man who changes his mind back and forth.

I'm not happy with the tone, but still "open minded" to the presentation.

One would think Kerry by nature would take a large share of the undecided vote. For the undecided voter, casting a ballot for the candidate who can't make up his mind would seem an irresistible act of self-indulgence, just as those who don't read much and mistrust intellectualism see something of themselves in Bush.

Got that? People who don't "read" lean towards Bush. Obviously all of the conservatives who dropped their Houston Chronicle subscriptions over biased presentations must not "read" anything anymore. And the editor who wrote this believes that he is "safe" because no conservative eyes would see his rant. The Chron runs its share of "all intellectuals in journalism and schools are liberals because it is the only position 'thinking' people could arrive at" letters every year. Liberal bigotry in all its ugly glory.

On a policy level, Bush and Kerry are like night and day. With some exceptions, Bush places the convenience of industry above environmental protection. Kerry, accused by the Bush campaign of being a flaming liberal, surely can be counted on to do the opposite.

Note how even he couldn't identify the Kerry position on the "issue".

Bush favors lower taxes and high federal deficits. Kerry wants higher social spending, higher taxes on the upper echelons of society and deficits lower than the record about to be set.

Another way of saying what the writer just said: Kerry wants increased socialism (flaming liberalism), Marxist tax structures ("From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"), and high federal deficits that may or may not be lower than Bush's (flip-flop).

Bush, often through his running mate, Vice President Dick Cheney, vows he will make America safer than Kerry will. If necessary, Bush will wage pre-emptive war unrestrained by allies or the United Nations. Kerry says he will pursue multilateral arrangements to contain nuclear proliferation and sort out the mess in the Persian Gulf, because even a superpower can't go it alone.

A husband and wife are a partnered relationship but even at the wedding ceremony, one spouse cannot take a vow for the other. If the terrorists see America as more vulnerable with Kerry in power, it doesn't mean that Kerry made America less safe, it just means that they will be likely to "touch the hot stove" just to see "what Kerry will do". We WILL be less safe, it has more to do with the lack of evidence of a spine in John Kerry (and comparisons to the decisive actions from George W. Bush even in spite of continued attacks from the global and leftist press).

Also, John Kerry DID speak out in 1997 to support President Clinton. He said that America's President (Bill Clinton or any president) did not need permission to do what was best for America, that it would be better to have nations like France and Russia on board but that they had financial deals with Iraq. Even UN support was not a "requirement". Then again, the Comical ignores Kerry's flip flops.

Undecided voters living in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and other battleground states, strategists predict, will decide the election. I hope they enjoy the attention they are getting and will cast their votes without fear or doubt.

Yeah, "don't make the wrong choice". Shades of Petah's rant, "America threw a temper tantrum" when the Republicans swept off year elections in 1994.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.