I thought the speech was excellent. He did a fine job of explaining what he had in mind as president. He reaffirmed my support of him for certain.

He did well for him, as well as Dubya can do, certainly. But I largely disagree with most of the assertions in his speech, so ...

And I also find the Vietnam bit overplayed to the point of insult.

For someone who apparently loathed his actions in Vietnam for so long - he sure is proud of it today isn't he?

The Most Interesting Thing That I Learned About John Kerry Last Night:_______________________________________________________________________

Tuh-RAY-Za isn't a hamster. More of a woodchuck really.

(Insert obligatory Richard Gere allusion here)

sorry about double TB

Gee if we're going to get serious here: how shocking not to mention Israel or the Middle East at all.

God. I did wish Kerry wouldn't have played up the Vietnam experience. I would have much rather heard him talk about Bush's Vietnam experience. Actually, it would have been great to hear about Bush' entire public service; all his years in the military and then in public life. Actually it would have been great to hear about Dick Cheney's years on the battlefield, sacrificing so much for America. Too much Kerry and Vietnam and not enough Bush and Dick in Vietnam.

YOU may have loved it, but it would have been an awful bad campaign strategy to do that during the convention. God I wish you were running Kerry's campaign ...

Kerry has every right to discuss his Vietnam experience as part of his resume, but he's going a bit over the top with it. It insults most fence-sitters with normal intelligence.

You can criticize Bush and Cheney all you want, but they aren't running on what they did 30 years ago.

To be perfectly honest, when John McCain ran for office he did NOT use his extraordinary Vietnam resume to nearly the extent that John Kerry relies on it ... and this earns him MORE respect.

Get it?

You know I don't get it. Bush is running on values, values, values since his record as President, Governor, and -- let's not even mention his business acumen simply put: Suck. Clinton had an incredible record as President but all conservatives wanted to focus on and spend tax dollars on was Clinton's moral failings. Paradoxically, the argument was that Clinton's behavior would lower America's esteem throughout the world. What a joke. The democratic world has never hated our president and its government more except terrorists like Osama Bin Laden who can only be cheering for every foreign leader Shrub pisses off.

So Kerry stresses Vietnam and his public service as prosecutor and Senator because it speaks to all the things Republicans have been whining about. I think the family stuff and the war stuff are cheesey. But why does he do it? Because, Bill from INDC, it speaks to the question of values: family, country, flag, God, leadership, etc. But instead of praising Kerry, Bill from INDC and others cry that Kerry's not talking about his record in the Senate. Give me a break. Let's talk about Bush's record while Kerry was serving his country as soldier, prosecuter, and Senator. While Kerry was getting shot at Bush was taking shots, probably doubles. While Kerry was serving in the Senate, Bush was serving it up with his buddy Ken Lay or getting bailed out of jail or business or whatever.

As for why John McCain didn't "use his extraordinary Vietnam resume" as much, two answers: 1) McCain LOST and was out of the race shortly after he demolished Bush in New Hampshire; and 2) McCain probably would have mentioned his service more if he didn't have to defend himself against Bush and his religious fundamentalists buddies who completely mislead the public in South Carolina in one of the sickest campaigns ever http://www.commondreams.org/views/022100-106.htm

1."So Kerry stresses Vietnam and his public service as prosecutor and Senator because it speaks to all the things Republicans have been whining about."

It almost amuses me that you are so tone deaf that you just view my attack (in the following post) on Kerry as a general attack instead of really understanding it. My complaint is that Kerry DOESN'T talk about his career as a prosecutor and ESPECIALLY his career in the Senate. A debate on issues, and how he's performed on issues is much more relevant than his 4 months of Vietnam service.

2. You automatically broaden the argument to an us vs. them, liberals vs. conservatives argument, bringing in the example of the Clintons. Let me ask: how the fuck do you know what I thought of Clinton? You assume a great deal.

I didn't care so much about Clinton's moral failings (though I thought that it was an incredibly reckless thing for someone to do, and it hurt the causes that he held dear). My real beef with Clinton was the fact that he took a defensive posture with American foreign policy, and weakness is provacative.

So do me a couple of favors:

Favor #1: RE-READ THE POST ABOVE THIS ONE (I don't even understand why you start this debate on the innocuous, fun hamster post). my problem is the fact that Kerry is overplaying his vietnam service. My larger point about McCain is, that he has such a more compelling, indicative story, but I have trouble believing that even he would have brought it up with the insulting redundancy of the Kerry campaign.

Favor #2: Don't assume that because I think Kerry is a jackass, that I somehow endorse the nutso right-wing Clinton conspiracy theorists and social conservatives that went after him in unseemly ways because of his immorality.

Two wrongs do not make a right. And while I'm certainly an anti-Kerry partisan, i would think that even left-wingers might get annoyed with the nam-nam-nam-nam-nam-nam-nam focus, instead of a debate on the ISSUES.

I really hope that kerry expands his message in the next few months. So should you.