Kennedy, like Kerry, deserves only a Mass. audience. Kennedy has been so full of it for so long and been so wrong that no one really ought to bother to listen to anything he has to say. If I am GW, I don't need some fat, over the hill humpster to advise me as to future courses of action. I'd be paying more attention to people on my staff that actually know things.

Anonymous,

Kennedy proposed getting out of Vietnam, "lock, stock and barrel." He was certainly right about that, as staying on in Vietnam did nothing but contribute to another 25,000 American deaths alone after Kennedy made the statement, with the same end result for Vietnam as would have resulted with an earlier withdrawal.

And what exactly does it mean to write "over the hill?" It seems to me to be fair to claim that someone's ideas are wrong, tired or outdated. However, it seems that mocking people per se because of age or weight are two of the remaining acceptable bigotries in this country.

If civil war is coming to Iraq, I'm not sure there is anything more our presence in Iraq can do to stave it off, particularly if the people there are tired of our presence.

Maybe you ought to post a picture of yourself and we can all vote on whether or not you are ugly.

It's interesting that before the election, the Bush line was that we'd be in Iraq for decades and decades. Kerry, the radical anti-war candidate, suggested that four years would be enough.

Now, though, everyone seems to want out as soon as we can--a position that even wimpy peacenik anti-war candidate didn't dare to endorse. Maybe we should have our own elections more frequently; the period immediately after them seems to restore our sanity.

I would certainly like to think that the sooner we withdraw, the sooner the Iraqi government can gain some semblence of independence from us, and possibly stability.

Considering the success in Bosnia and Kosovo and how long it took, the US isn't going anywhere.