A bit unfair to Chamberlain, perhaps. During the years of appeasement, he *did* support the improvement of British military capability, particularly the RAF. And when it came down to it, after the invasion of Poland, he *did* sign the declaration of war.

With all his weaknesses, a much more serious man than John Kerry.

"During the years of appeasement, he *did* support the improvement of British military capability, particularly the RAF." Yes and no. Most of the credit for the improved capability for the RAF belongs to Churchill. It was Churchill who exposed the fact that Chamberlain's government included obsolete aircraft in his figures PLUS unassembled aircraft as operational. Giving Chamberlain credit is like giving Clinton credit for welfare reform...sure he went along but he wasn't the instigator.

Finally and reluctantly Chamberlains declared war and got Churchill in the cabinet but his handling of the war was iffy at best. Thank God Churchill took over when he did and held back the RAF fighter squadrons.

"With all his weaknesses, a much more serious man than John Kerry." The sad truth is this is true. Kerry is such a bad man and a weak candidate it is almost unbelievable. Sure the Dems picked their only war hero Roman Catholic since JFK but they had to pick someone who is deeply disliked and distrusted by practicing Catholics. JFKennedy at least won over many social conservatives because he was a strong anti-communist, supported the military and appeared to be a serious Catholic who respected Catholic teachings. Now of course we know he was a lousy Catholic like most but not all the Kennedys. (it is not fair to generalize)

But unlike JFKennedy this JFK will NOT get Billy Graham's support or serious protestant minister support nor many Catholic leaders, religious or intellectuals. He will lose the military vote...he will get less of the black vote than Gore and less of the Woman vote than Gore...he will lose the marrried vote....I still say that barring hugh voter fraud Bush will win in a landsldie in the Electoral College.

Thank God for the Founding Fathers and the Electoral College. No matter how many votes are cast illegally in big city blue states those bogus numbers cannot bleed into other states.

On an electoral college basis Bush should win. Virginia, of course, it goes without saying is already lost to Kerry. Of course, things could happen between now and the election but remember most people like me are voting now. My son and I have already voted. I realize we are too honest to vote in both California and Virginia (I vote in California) so we only voted once but at least it was an honest vote. I believe voter fraud is a serious threat to our democracy.

I also believe, and I have shared this Steven with Diane and other friends of your circle, that many Europeans would love to double cross Israel. But it just goes to show you the British are Islanders they are not mainlanders.

They go their own way. My working class Scottish friends are all for hammering the worthy middle eastern gentlemen to put it politely. There is great fear in France and Britain about the Moslem immigrant population as places for terrorists to find cover.

Kerry....did he or didn't he get a dishonorable discharge...why won't he release ALL OF HIS RECORDS...there is a skeleton in that closet...and it could blow any day...

This is, incredibly, one of the most significant elections in American history with 1800. 1824, 1860, 1876 1912, 1940.

I think the ghost of 1968 amd 1972 will haunt this election. Kerry was a Humphrey man and a McGovern man but unlike Carter and Clinton he is NOT a SOUTHERNER. Adding Edwards was a step in the right direction except for the fact that Edwards is not even popular in his own home state.

Sorry Charlie only the best numina get sun-kissed. The so-called Kerry-lad is soon to be history, But not to worry. I understand Club-med is looking for a president and the PLO also need advisors and lobbyists. There's an opening for Edwards too....this is the weakest pair since I don't know when.

Gore and Lieberman by comparison were Ruth and Gehrig. McGovern-Shriver were Jefferson and Adams by comparison.

So Bush is no Lincoln no TR but he's a Kitchner or an Eisenhower that will do just fine. So Ole W. in '04...don't change horses in midstream

Ricardo,
I agree with everything you say and would add that this election is one battle in an enormous culture war--really a civil war. The Vietnam protest generation, now ensconsed in the media and universities, is recruiting young people for a reliving of the heady days of the '60's. Can they ride the traitorous Kerry to victory? To do so they'll have to convince a majority that we are as bad as the Islamo-Nazis. I noticed that %50+ of Dems believe the United States is to blame for 9-11! Does Vietnam mean anything, except that we were bad, to the younger generation? God help us all if Kerry gets elected.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: