"Four More Years... Of Hell!"

Answering hecklers in Milwaukee, yesterday, Teresa Heinz Kerry answered, "They want four more years of hell." She then led a cheer of "Three more months!"

I think I like Teresa Heinz Kerry... A LOT!

I truly believe that George W. Bush is the worst president that this country has ever had to endure. How it is that nearly fifty percent of the electorate intend on voting for the man is beyond my wildest comprehension!

Not long ago, I believed that there was really very little difference between a Democrat or a Republican in the White House; I believed that corporations essentially ran the country.

Since 2001, however, George W. Bush has shown that all it takes is unbending, crony-serving will to position this country on the rim of the proverbial toilet.

Not in the history of the world has a sovereign nation cut taxes during wartime; not once. Until Bush came along. The deficits that Bush has run up with his Project for the New American Century war pals (sadly, wasting away the Clinton-era surpluses) has not only set much of the country back a few years, but promises to be a burden for my children and possibly my children's children. Consider, for a moment, just how much Bush's tax cuts have truly improved your lives. Then consider how much those cuts have improved the lives of those in the top one percent of the economic ladder.

If ever the United States was in a position to take a leadership role in the world, it was in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. The world was lined up at this country's door, ready to help us recover -- as a nation -- from the death and destruction of that day; justice was on our side lo those years ago. How did Bush show appreciation for that support? He went to war with a nation that 1. didn't have anything to do with the attacks; and 2. was of no threat to the United States -- with or without the supposed weapons of mass destruction.

There is much truth in what Michael Moore said when he called the American people ignorant. Only about fifty percent of eligible voters are registered. Of that fifty percent, only about fifty percent actually vote. I would hazard a guess that about fifty percent of those who vote actually educate themselves about the issues or the candidates.

We elect our presidents without being truly informed. We elect ignorant, uninformed presidents -- presidents who can't put two words together without a teleprompter. That George W. Bush is President of the United States is evidence enough that we are an ignorant people.

Questions for anyone considering voting for Bush would have to include:

Do you realize that as the environment goes to pot, so does our health? Do you realize that the more war we create, the more enemies we create? Do you realize that the more our government kowtows to big business -- whether within our borders or without -- the more the individual suffers? Do you realize that as these corprations expand globally, that they lay the American worker to waste for the purposes of creating higher profit margins at the expense of "un-(or under-)derdeveloped" countries?

Do you truly understand the cause-and-effect of this unbridled world reach? Is it any wonder that terrorists attacked the world's financial center? Do you really think it was because they hate our freedom? Perhaps if -- as the Bush administration apparently does -- you equate freedom with profiteering.

The terrorists of September 11 attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That almost 3,000 people were killed in the attacks was the least of their concerns; their interest was in striking a blow to the biggest symbols of economic and military world domination. Similarly, the 900-plus American soldiers (nearly a third the number killed on September 11, by the way) and 10,000-plus Iraqis are of little concern to the Bush administration -- curiously, a "pro-life" administration.

Our President, so quick to use the flag-waving images of September 11 in one of his first campaign ads, has yet to attend a single flag-draped funeral of a returning Iraq War soldier. He so boldly barked "Bring it on!" He so brazenly pronounced, "Mission Accomplished." Yet he so meekly avoids facing the families of those who fell victim to those who accepted Bush's taunt, or to the families of the many whose last mission preceded their twentieth birthday.

Many years ago, I asked my Republican brother, "Is a worsening environment what you want to pass on to your grandchildren and your grandchildren's children?" His reply was, "What the hell do I care? I'm not going to be around." This is precisely the shortsightedness illustrated by George Bush and this most vile of administrations.

In accepting the Democratic Party's nomination for President in 1960, John Kennedy said, "Perhaps we could afford a Coolidge following Harding. And perhaps we could afford a Pierce following Fillmore. But after Buchanan this nation needed Lincoln; after Taft we needed Wilson; and after Hoover we needed Franklin Roosevelt."

And after four years of Bush, we seriously need John Kerry.