Once upon a time-- about twelve years ago to be exact-- a man sought the White House up against incredible odds. He came from Arkansas and prided himself in being a New Democrat; a break from the traditional tax-and-spend liberal type that many Americans pictured most Democrats. America, in 1992, was a vastly different country. Terrorism had yet to reach our borders, and the nation was coming off a very successful Desert Storm military campaign in which a dictatorship was driven out of the sovereign nation it had invaded and occupied. America was also gripped by a deep recession that had caused high unemployment, a rise of costs, and a political quagmire for the sitting President, George H.W. Bush. The first Bush was seen as a man who lost touch with the common American. He was lauded as a great statesman, but his domestic policies left a lot to be desired. His attempts to repair the nation’s economy were failed. While unemployed Americans picketed outside his summer home in Kennebunkport, ME, the President stayed inside and gave the public the impression that he really didn’t care too much about these suffering Americans.

      In a time of crisis, people want to turn to someone who can change the picture. Bill Clinton was seen as that someone in 1992. He offered many great programs that would bring down the colossal national debt while creating jobs and raising the standard of living for millions of people. He showed empathy for the working class, and it caused his popularity to increase week by week. But Clinton came with a lot of baggage that was exploited by Bush and the media alike. There were two main problems with Clinton’s character. The first and most obvious problem was his womanizing, which would almost lead to his downfall. Gennifer Flowers, a woman he had an extramarital affair with while he was Governor of Arkansas, came forward with her tales of deceit and seduction. Clinton’s political stance was affected, but he seemed to take it all in stride. The public cared somewhat about it, but there were greater issues to worry about than a politician’s womanizing.

      The second piece of baggage Clinton had, the second piece that was exploited by Bush and the media alike, was the fact that Clinton did not serve with the Armed Forces in Vietnam. He, in fact, avoided the war altogether, fleeing to England to study at Oxford University. He was painted as a draft dodger. The media and Bush may very well have been right about that. He didn’t serve in the military, and he should have been censured by the public for that. Clinton’s political stance was affected, but he seemed to take it all in stride, just as he had with the womanizing allegations. The public cared somewhat about it, but there were greater issues to worry about than a politician’s war record twenty years earlier.

      George H.W. Bush attacked Bill Clinton for his womanizing and for his failure to serve his country during a time of war. Bush had every right to do so. Bush was and still is faithfully married to his wife, Barbara. There has been yet to be any well-publicized report of any under-the-desk senior Bush shenanigans with other women. Until proven otherwise (and that’s a longshot considering Bush’s age), his morals are squeaky clean. The patriarch of the Bush family also served his country in World War II. As part of the Greatest Generation, Bush flew Navy jet fighters in the Pacific Theater, even surviving a plane crash. Bush didn’t duck combat when his country needed him. The senior Bush, for all his faults, attacked Clinton and did it with integrity because he put his money where his mouth was. He attacked a womanizing draft dodger because he was a faithful war veteran.

      Still, all of these things didn’t really matter in the eyes of the American people in 1992. Why? The American people were suffering and they needed change. There was no question about the morals of Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. Clinton’s morals were in the gutter; Bush’s morals were in the penthouse. If elections were decided on character, Bush would have won easily. But elections are decided primarily on the pocketbooks and wallets of the American people. And those pocketbooks and wallets were rather light back in 1992. The issue was the economy, and George H.W. Bush was a failure as an economic President. The American people judged him that way by voting him out of office after Bush had a 93% approval rating earlier in his tenure. The economy was that bad.

      Now we jump twelve years to the present date. Another Bush is in the White House, and this Bush is a far different President than his father. George W. Bush has to be the most controversial President in American history. His Presidency has been controversial right from the start. He did not win the popular vote, but somehow squeaked by with the electoral vote with a win in Florida. The Florida vote was tainted by controversy, as thousands of ex-convicts were purged from the voting rolls, including those who were not yet convicted of crimes as of Election Day 2000. The butterfly ballot also confused enough people that miniscule third party candidates received votes that should have gone to Bush’s opponent, Vice President Al Gore. Court arguments and recounts of votes were marred by Republican activists, who carried “Sore-Loserman” signs and even went as far as to verbally taunt, harass, and intimidate election officials in the midst of the recount. The media also painted a picture that Bush should have won in the first place, and that Gore’s questioning of the Florida vote was wrong.

      When the smoke from the Florida recount cleared, Bush was declared the winner, and became the 43^rd President. Since that time, his Presidency has been a roller-coaster ride. His popularity was tanking throughout 2001 when he pushed a massive tax cut through Congress and a recession gripped the nation. However, after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the nation rallied around the Commander in Chief. They looked to George W. Bush as a source of strength and resolve. They looked to him to console us, and also to find who perpetrated these attacks and to get them. Bush announced that Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban regime of Afghanistan were responsible. He set out to get them, and did succeed in overthrowing the Taliban from power. However, he failed to capture or kill bin Laden. He damaged al-Qaeda, but did not destroy them. He also damaged the Taliban regime, but failed to capture or kill their fundamentalist leaders. A fragile, democratic government has been established in Afghanistan, but the main perpetrators of the September 11^th attacks are still out there.

      Even with these dangerous individuals and groups at large, Bush then shifted the focus of his war on terrorism to Iraq. His administration claimed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. His administration claimed that Iraq was a breeding ground for international terrorists. His administration claimed that there was even a possible link to Saddam and al-Qaeda, and therefore a link to Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. Bush pushed for military action, and wanted the world to join him. A few stepped up, but most wanted to avoid war. Nobody questioned the fact that Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator and a murderer. However, there did not seem to be an immediate threat posed by Saddam to global security. There didn’t seem to be a link between Iraq and 9/11 in the minds of the international community. They believed that the focus should still be on Afghanistan. That’s where bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the rest of the masterminds were. Get them first, and then, if you must, get Saddam.

      Bush, however, was persistent and insistent. Saddam was a threat. He was building a dynamic arsenal to attack America and the world with. The United Nations tried to compromise and sent in inspectors. The inspectors weren’t going to find anything. Advance warning had been given, and Saddam was no doubt going to destroy anything he had that was possibly incriminating. The Bush administration knew that, and they tried presenting a case before the UN Security Council. Even after Colin Powell’s dramatic presentation of evidence, the world remained unconvinced and didn’t want to support a war against Iraq. Bush then went over the collective dead bodies of the entire civilized world and went to war with Iraq anyway.

      America then supported the war in Iraq like nothing else. A perception came out of that war-- you’re either with us, or with the terrorists. This perception was the most un-American thing anyone could have possibly said. There are a few radicals out there that don’t like anything America does. Perhaps they are un-American and are with the terrorists. But most people who opposed the war in Iraq hate Saddam just as much as everyone else. They want to get the terrorists-- bin Laden, al-Qaeda, the Taliban-- those with links to 9/11 that are still at large. They hold more of a priority than Saddam did. Yet, those against the war were railed as un-American.

      This perception is totally false, yet most in the public and in the media glorified that perception.

      The War in Iraq was successful only on paper. Saddam’s regime was toppled inside of a month, and he would eventually be captured for trial. However, the Bush administration waited too long to establish an interim government. The toppling of Saddam created a massive power vacuum. Many of the Iraqi citizenry were not grateful to their American liberators, and quickly wanted them out of the way. Several fundamentalist Islamic leaders, who had been lying low during Saddam’s secular reign, shot to the forefront and gathered followers who were willing to go after the occupying forces. On May 1, 2003, President Bush declared that the mission in Iraq was accomplished. Since that time, more Americans have been killed than the entire war between March 19 and May 1, 2003. Several Americans have been kidnapped and beheaded by Islamic extremists. The interim government has been plagued by assassination attempts and is fragile to say the least. The Iraqi army is inexperienced and weak. The religious and ethnic diversity of Iraq is now starting to get the better of society, and a civil war is not beyond the realm of possibility.

      The war in Iraq has seemed to do more harm than good. While we got rid of one dictator, several potentially lethal dictators in their own right have taken his place. The country once in fear of one dictator is now in fear of no one. The people once grateful to being liberated are now wanting us out of the country entirely. And we haven’t helped our case much; images have been seen throughout the world of American abuse of captured Iraqi prisoners. A few rotten apples within the American military have sunk to the lows of the dictator we just defeated, and have added fuel to the anti-American fire that fundamentalist Islam has had burning for years. Now we may never pull our army from Iraq. We’re there for the long haul, lest the fundamentalists rise up and take control.

      Aside from these international burdens, our economy is still very weak. Unemployment is still higher than it should be. American jobs by the thousands are being outsourced to foreign countries. The cost of housing is skyrocketing. The cost of prescription drugs is skyrocketing. The cost of almost everything is skyrocketing. Forty-five million Americans have no health insurance coverage. Those that do have health insurance have their coverage overseen by big businesses, not doctors. Sixty million Americans live below the poverty line. Many Americans living below the poverty line are the families of American soldiers. Some of them are forced to stand on bread lines to receive charity portions of food for their children to eat. Millions of civilian children go to sleep as hungry as they were waking up the morning before. The richest Americans continue to get richer; the poorest Americans continue to get poorer. Social Security funds are evaporating. A record $4 trillion surplus left by the Clinton administration has vanished, replaced by a Bush-created $6 trillion deficit, the largest in history.

      This nation is gripped by one problem after another. This nation begs for change, and it has one main alternative. The problem is that John Kerry is not the most likable candidate in the world. He is, however, the one with the most experience and the one with the best chance of defeating George W. Bush. But, like Bill Clinton, Kerry comes with baggage. He has two specifically bulky pieces of baggage that the Bush administration and the media have exploited equally. First, he has a flip-flop voting record as a Senator. He did vote against numerous defense spending bills, even though he did vote during different times than today. His indecisiveness has been a subject of concern to say the least. It is definitely a problem.

      The second piece of baggage is, amazingly, Kerry’s war record. Kerry served as a lieutenant during the Vietnam War. His record is tarnished by his anti-war activism after returning from his tour of duty. He saw the horrors of the war and spoke out against it. That was his right, and he did take heat for it both in the past and in the present. The Bush administration has exploited this and attacked Kerry for his protesting of the war.

      But what right does the Bush administration have to attack the opponent’s military service? The answer is that they have no right. John Kerry fought for the United States of America in Vietnam. He came from money, and he could have bought his way out of service. Instead, he stood up, stuck his neck out, and fought for our country. Where was George W. Bush? Bush was thousands of miles away from Vietnam, lying low in the Alabama National Guard, in a position of unimportance that his father helped secure for him. Where was Dick Cheney, junior Bush’s number two man? He, too, was thousands of miles away from action. He was at home in America, receiving not one, not two, not three, not four, but five-- FIVE-- deferments from active duty. These deferments were not due to bad health-- they were due to the fact that Cheney didn’t want to fight, and he weaseled his way out of his patriotic duty to this nation.

      Yet, the media and the public alike has bought the Bush notion that Kerry is somehow un-American. John Kerry-- a Vietnam veteran-- has been made to look like the bad guy against George W. Bush-- a borderline draft dodger. Which is worse-- fighting for your country and then speaking out against the war, or totally avoiding the war altogether? There’s a difference between being a pacifist and being a coward. Bush and Cheney were cowards during the Vietnam War. They were for the war but against fighting it, just as they are for fighting wars but not taking part in the combat. They haven’t sent their children to Iraq or Afghanistan, but they have no problem sending other people’s children there. The Kennedy family sent Joseph, Jr. and John to battle during World War II. Joseph Kennedy, Sr. could have easily bribed his sons out of battle. Instead, they went to fight for America. On what aircraft carrier do Jenna and Barbara Bush serve? What tanks are the Cheney kids driving through the desert?

       America is totally missing the boat when it comes to John Kerry. Kerry went to fight the war. Yes, he came back and protested the war. Many soldiers did. They saw the horrors of the conflict and were disgusted. That was John Kerry’s right to do so. It wasn’t as if Kerry became a turncoat and joined the North Vietnamese army. Kerry stayed with America; he had a dissenting opinion. If that makes him un-American, then we are all un-American, because we all have dissenting opinions about something, whether its war, or national security, or the economy, or gun control, or gay marriage, or religious freedom, or abortion, or a host of other issues.

      We also are forgetting one thing about Vietnam. It is a fact that has been proven through history. Our involvement in Vietnam was increased on the basis of a government fabrication. Lyndon Baines Johnson increased American involvement through the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, a bill passed by Congress at his urging. The bill came into being after an American aircraft carrier was supposedly bombed by communist aircraft in the Gulf of Tonkin. LBJ got overwhelming support from Congress, and the war machine kicked into high gear. Years later, it has been proven that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was one big lie. It was just an excuse made up by the Johnson administration so America could become more deeply involved in Vietnam. We are also forgetting that Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense under LBJ and JFK, has come out openly to say that the Vietnam War was unjust. These are the facts, and they are undisputable.

      Maybe Kerry was on to something in his anti-war protests during the 1970s.

      But we, as a whole, really don’t care about the facts. We hear only what we want to hear, only what the media wants us to hear. We hear about “Hanoi Kerry” and his liberal flip-flop ways; we don’t hear about Coward Cheney and his Halliburton-endorsed policies. We hear about the Swift Boat Veterans that are critical of Kerry’s service; we don’t hear about the Alabama National Guard and Bush’s role in the Vietnam War. We hear about Kerry’s defense spending record; we don’t hear about Bush’s records on healthcare, Social Security, or job creation. We hear the cries of the poor and the middle class struggling to make ends meet. The cries are then drowned out by Republican bashing of John Kerry, John Edwards, the Democrats, and liberals in general. The people are begging for help from the Republican Party. The party turns its back to them, handing them some pro-Bush pompoms, the American flag, and a rant on how John Kerry is sending America to hell. As if the pompoms, the flag, and a rant can feed a family, clothe a family, shelter a family, heal a family. The Republicans offer neither alternatives nor explanations to justify a second George W. Bush term in the White House. All they offer are rhetoric and lies.

      This country needs to wake up and get its act together. George W. Bush and the Republican Party are doing nothing for the American people but sending us to die and fattening their own pockets on the toil and sweat of the working class. They’re trying to pull the wool over our eyes and shield us from the detrimental damage they are inflicting upon our society as a whole. They are succeeding in that process. We need to see the world as it is and not as they want us to see it. It isn’t all in black and white. The Bush administration must be voted out of office. They have hijacked everything that is American, including our own flag, and have turned it against its own people. America belongs to all of us, not just one group or one ideology. America is one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. If this is to be preserved, then we must vote for John Kerry and against George W. Bush.

      This is our last chance. If Bush wins re-election, it will bring us only future heartbreak and future economic suffering. There will be no hope of having Social Security in twenty years, or establishing universal healthcare, or even closing the budget gap. Wake up and smell the coffee, people!  The Republicans are destroying our democracy, our livelihood, and our way of life.

      We are NOT better off than we were four years ago. We are judged not by the people we defeat, but by the people that win.

      If George W. Bush wins re-election, what kind of judgment would that be upon us?