Hey Kendall, I agree with you about Dean. He shot himself in the
lip.

As to why Kerry voted agains't the first Iraq war, he was probably gun shy about another Vietnam. Most of what was proven was simply
hearsay. It was mostly about the burning of oil wells. I think he
thought it might be solved by other means such as including
the international community in the decision making. He has been consistent on this in his statements.

Kerry has a history of military service. He sees things in terms
of military intelligence which he probably believed and found
out later to be faulty. I think a person with his background
can change his mind to the benefit of the country without being
perceived mechanically as a "flip flopper". Bush certainly has
the prize on this issue. "Not a nation builder". Unfunded policies by members of his own political party in congress. "Uniter not
a divider"? "No child left behind"?    The list goes on. The rationale for Bush changing his mind was that times and conditions change. Remember the old saying "Things changed after 911"?
And I believe that conditions do change.
This does not require rigid position taking
but response-ability to the new conditions. I think it's
a credit to Kerry to be able to do this. It's working with
the situation rather than against it.

Nader is a spoiler. It's only ego that keeps him in the race.
He has nothing to contribute. Kucinich has already articulated
Nader's position better than Nader himself.

BTW, wouldn't it be nice if all these Guests who are discussing with one another would be polite enough or possibly sincere enough to reveal who they are.

Frank