[weegee]

President Bush has long made it clear that he wants to win on the "issues". However the past actions of a man (who may have acted as a traitor to this nation in a time of war) do have relevancy from time to time.

If Kerry's post-service Vietnam War activities do not have any relevancy, then does his time in the Senate have any relevancy? After all, he has held several positions on all issues (so it would be unfair to hound him if he has changed his mind and heart). Also, he did not spend all of the time in the Senate he was elected to serve so it would be unfair to hound him with his Senate record when he obviously had better things to do.

[Arizona Carolyn]

I would have loved to see it brought up in the first debate. It BELONGED in the first debate and Kerry had the "Democrats" commentator to keep him out of trouble... Even, though, the President had an opportunity when he was trashing him on Iraq and didn't seize the day.