---------,

I am guessing you took some time to write this, so I hope you will take some time to read this. I have quite a few problems with your claims, as I think you have been heavily influenced by Fox News and right wing media groups (ie. Swift Boat Veterans, GOP.com, etc...). It sounds to me like you have a lot of misinformation. On a side note I would look to more bipartisan news networks such as NPR or CSPAN, or perhaps reading a family owned newspaper or magazine like The Washington Post or Newsweek. If you really want worldly perspective then try The Economist (I know you probably do not care how the world views us, but for every president up to this administration, this was a big deal). I will comment on what you have said...

Matt,

I respect all that you understand about politics and the views that you

have. But whether you like it or not, this years election is not

between Bush and Kerry. It's between Bush and not Bush. John Kerry was

not even the Democrats first choice. At one point screaming Dean had

the highest political ratings that would have easily put him over the

top of Kerry.

I am sure you understand what the primaries are for. They are to make a first choice for president for a party. Also, the only time Dean has ever been ahead of Kerry is in the polls. And if you believe that the polls determine the front runner then you would succeed that Bush is beat and Kerry is America's first choice (After all, Kerry is ahead in every major US poll). Also if you believe this, then you would remember (has four years really been that long) how McCain led President Bush in the polls and even beat him out through the first seven states (5 out of 7 if I remember). This, by your rational, makes Bush the second choice. Also too, "Screaming Dean" didn't come about until after Kerry had beaten him up in the first two primaries.

All I've ever seen from Kerry is constant changing of

position to make himself look or appear one with the people. First of

all the Vietnam war, it was more of a war in America, people not

supporting the cause. We won Vietnam, yes at the cost of many lives,

but for the cause of truth, liberty and freedom. . . lives will be

lost. If you don't believe in sacrifice, you can't believe in any other

than yourself. (of course I expect you to come back and attack this

point)

I am not going to attack this point as history does this all too well. However, I will remind you that Vietnam was never about OUR truth, liberty, and freedom as you have alluded to (I am guessing you worded this to apply to the Vietnamese, but it looks like you are referring to the US). Perhaps if you read quite a few of the soldiers comments upon returning home you will find that, like half of America at the time, the soldiers themselves were very confused about what they were dieing for. This is exactly what Kerry did upon returning home. He protested the war because of the morale within Vietnam and the US. He retold accounts of many of his commanding officers who were concerned with the lack of direction from Washington.

Kerry has been called out by many of his own officers in

Vietnam, testifying that Kerry is not fit to be a commander in chief.

One of the purple hearts that was awarded to him, was inflicted by his

own rifle and a malfunction, a scratch on his arm during a period when

there was no cross fire. Matt, that's like getting the player of the

game for twisting your ankle when your doing warm ups. He hated that he

was apart of Vietnam and everything about it, even to the point were he

tossed his medals on the White House lawn??? Even if that wasn't true,

he didn't respect the honors enough to keep them and cherish the time

were he served something greater than himself. NOW, he has the audacity

to bank on his military record, telling the American people that he was

a war hero??

Perhaps of all your thoughts in this email, these are the ones I have the most problem with. The GOP has been working very hard to tarnish Kerry’s war record. Before I state who these groups are, and what they stand for, might I remind you that it was Kerry who raised his hand and said “I will go” when Bush and Cheney were calling up their political connections to keep them home. The officers you refer to? Do you have names for me, or is it just random people referred to in some right wing article. Let me tell you what I do know. Of the eight people that served on the swift boats Kerry commanded, seven of them are campaigning with Kerry. The other has made it a point not to jump into the political arena. Each one of these individuals testified what type of soldier and commander Kerry was. You should know that the Anti-Kerry swift boat veterans where most of this Kerry crap comes from was started by a man who arrived three months after Kerry left. He didn’t even know Kerry in Vietnam! You are also so quick to discount the nature of Kerry’s wounds in Vietnam; well that charge was generated by Swift Boat Veterans. I am also guessing you have seen the video they released on their website proclaiming the charges of Kerry’s wounds. Do you know what McCain came out and said? Here is part of the write up…

…The general counsel for the Kerry campaign and the Democratic National Committee sent television stations a letter asking them not to run the ad because it is "an inflammatory, outrageous lie" by people purporting to have served with Kerry.

In an interview with the Associated Press, McCain called the ad "dishonest and dishonorable." Asked if the White House was behind it, McCain said: "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad."

Soon after, White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to do so and instead criticize the financing of the ad, saying the president "deplores all the unregulated soft-money activity." McClellan said the Bush campaign had nothing to do with the ad or the group behind it. "We have not and we will not question Kerry's service in Vietnam," he said.” (Washington Post)

I am amazed that you are splitting hairs about how Kerry was wounded while he put his life on the line for our government. The fact that he went and served our wonderful nation without hesitation should be ample evidence of his love for America.

Matt, this completely against the Democrat platform,

supporting his military record. If heard of many stories were Democrat

are not supporting him, just because he pulled that sneaky stunt. He's

doing it to get votes, to convince the American people that his record,

his military record make him fit to fight the war on terror.

You “heard” of many democrats not supporting Kerry for this? Is that kind of like saying I heard that many Republicans are not supporting Bush for his reckless foreign policy? And speaking of pulling stunts for votes, what do you think the Gay Marriage amendment is about? If you think that even has a miniscule shot at passing then you better study your government again.

You might

not call Saddam a terrorist, that is a stupid argument, but when all is

said and done, it was evil. Regardless of what motives the media paints

for the American people, it was a good thing and still is a good thing

that the American Government fight this war on Terror.

Like the right wing media you are still trying to convince yourself that this is about the war on terror. This war is about removing a brutal dictator as you have no evidence of ties of Iraq with 9-11 or for Al Queda for that matter. You have no evidence of WMD, the very thing they would use against us if they were terrorists. Let me tell you about North Korea that has openly defied use and has even proclaimed they have WMD. Why are we not challenging them? Or if you are so concerned with brutal dictators, there is one about 100 miles of the US coast. Why not attack them? The point is this war was about something other then keeping our nation free from terrorists. If you want to keep your children free from bee stings do you go and knock down the bee hive next your house? Don’t think for a second that Kerry wouldn't have taken action against 9-11 or any reasonable threat against our country. Of course he will also follow the wise quotes of one of the greatest American presidents, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

Wherever it may

be. It's just a matter of time when we let our guard down that they

will launch another attack on U.S. soil. Just like President Reagan,

President Bush recognizes the threat of evil and knows that the cost of

defeating this terrorism is irrelevant. When we out spent the Russians

in military spending and were strong on stand to defeat communism, many

people wanted to just accept that communism was going to exist. Ronald

Reagan knew that there was an end.

It is so interesting that you compare Bush to Reagan in this context. Do you know what Reagan was all about? Diplomacy. He never challenged the UN. He never separated himself with the world powers, and he never started a preemptive strike with out solid irrefutable evidence. Contrast this statement with Bush. Bush should not even be dignified with having his name in the same sentence as a president who built his administration around foreign policy!

The only person in Europe to

recognize that Hitler was going to be a problem was Wiston Churchill.

The other government officials said that was going on was not threat to

their country and to just be peaceful about the situation and it will go

away. Now, Communism is almost completely vanished from the earth.

Bush and his well staff administration recognizes the threat of

terrorism and evil that is in the world.

If you really think that any president has the power to vanish terrorism, you are living in a dream. Since you say that communism is “almost completely vanished from the earth” then you are forgetting about the 1/3 of the world’s population that still live in these societies (China, No. Korea, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam). I, like president Bush and John Kerry, believe in fighting against terrorism. It is a long road and I assure you that diplomacy is one of the greatest assets in fighting this war. Look at Pakistan fighting hard to find remnants of the Taliban. A great example of how diplomacy works.

Health Care, the environment,

the economy, unemployment rate, interest rates, and other political

issues don't matter if the American public is not safe from evil.

They don’t matter because Bush can not use any of these to win this election.

If

they don't have the sense of safety, they will be affaid to do things

that make this country great. If we are going to roll with the punches

and be a country of peace, completely or even partially turning our

heads to evil, the malicious attitude of the enemy will be encouraged to

inflict even more terror on America. Other important issues that are at

hand; with the next administration there might be a change of 2 or even

3 Supreme Court Justices.

Even if Kerry is able to appoint two Justices, they won’t be left extremist. In order for his Justices to take the stand they have to be approved by the republican-led congress. Trust me, they will be very conservative democrats. You should also remember that seven of the nine justices are republican, and have been appointed by republican presidents. So even if there are two more Democrats appointed, the republican judges will still maintain the majority! It sounds to me like you have little faith in your party.

With Kerry, the moral fabric of our country

will be completely weakened because he will try to appease others rather

than sticking to his own morals. He will try to make this a country

that supports and recognises all forms of life, and social standards,

and ethnic views.

Isn’t this what makes America great? Recognizing all forms of life (actually I do not understand what you mean by this statement), Recognizing all social standards, and recognizing all ethnic views? We are a country rich with diversity, and the moment we do not recognize these things we will become like the Nazi’s who hated the non-Christians for their social standards and ethnic views.

Sooner or later, it will be to the point were God is

completely removed from anything in our Government. WE CANNOT FAIL TO

RECOGNISE GOD< AT ANY TIME!!! Look at his stance on Abortion. Sure he

believes that it's completely wrong . . .personally, but his political

views are more important than is moral and "church" views on the issue.

I think you need to remember that the inspired framers of the constitution made it a point to separate God from the government. Though they made it a point to remind everybody that they believed in God (except for Jefferson of course), those beliefs would not be regulated by law. Why do you think that abortion will never be reversed (if you think it will let me remind you that the republicans control the house, senate, Supreme Court, and presidency and they haven’t reversed it)? Abortion, though a moral issue, is not an issue for this government or governments to follow. The constitution was put in place to protect our freedoms and civil rights. Very few will argue that abortion is right, but many will argue that it is not the government’s place to challenge the very rights the framers of the constitution believed in, Civil Liberties.

Look around you ------, the moral fabric of our country has unraveled over the past four years. Education funding has been cut. Medicare funding has been cut. Police funding has been cut (20,000 police have lost their jobs!) Environmental issues have been reversed. Tax policies have been passed to benefit the top 1 % of the nation. After school programs have been cut. And Bush has flipped flopped in the past four years more then Kerry in the past 20. Get the weapons inspectors in to avoid war, no wait, attack Iraq even though they are complying with the inspectors (and don’t think for a second they were not complying…look at what Blix and Kay were saying). Attack Iraq for WMD, no wait, Al Queda ties, no wait, liberation issue. No homeland security department, no wait, sign it into law. No 9-11 commission, no wait, implement all their recommendations. No child left behind, no wait, cut the funding. Should I stop there?

Matt, I can't see how you support this man, he is websters definition of

priestcraft.

This is a bit over the top even for you. Definition of priest craft is using the name of deity for personal gain. Iif anyone fits this mold look at Bush’s use of the Christian coalition for votes!

The last point I want make is we are in such a delicate

period of our countries history and we need to stick to current policies

and procedures and more importantly not waste another year or two by

changing the administration. I'm afraid that all the progress that we

have made will be lost. Kerry will come in and completely try to turn

everything completely around for the best and even honestly thinking

that it's the best for the country. But if you are constantly changing

direction, still very difficult to move forward. This country has a

very strong economy right now

(Dow is now under 10,000, only 40,000 jobs added last month, GDP inflated due to military spending, and inflation is growing faster then the economy…what makes this a strong economy? I’m confused???)

, things are looking up, even though you

and the liberal media will paint the picture differently . . . things

are good and going to get better. Even if you don't support Bush,

please reconsider voting for Kerry.

--------.

If you think the media is liberal you should go back and read what you wrote and ask yourself how much factual data is involved. The information you are throwing out is from the right wing conservative media. Like many individuals, you probably hear something that contradicts what you believe and you discount it as “Liberal Media”. Try using these contradictions to fuel research. If you really are unconvinced that media has become more conservative, remember who the FCC chairman is and who some of the largest donors are to the Bush campaign.

You are probably disgusted with me by now wondering how I have fallen so far off the wagon. I guess that is what makes America great---so many people with so many views.

~Matthew