[mburbank]

A.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was not aware thay Kerry has any national advertising featuring people complaining about W's use of 9/11 imagery. Everything I've heard on that was in the news, not advertisements, and nothing I read many any mention of Kerry advertising.

B.) The article purports that Kerry has given to organizations that some of these 'complainers' are members of. If this is what means he 'pid' them to do it, so have I, since I've contributed to some of those same organizations. The op-ed makes this seem as if the claim is that Kerry hired actors, as opposed to actual people who actually gree with him, who I don't think were hired to appear in ads I'm not aware of.

C.) I think since W said he had no intention of politicsing 9/11 (a laughable claim at the time) and since he will not allow any media coverage of dead soldiers returning home, his use of of the dead from 9/11 is, to use one of your favorite words, hypocritical.

D.) If W. wants to politicize his involvment with and connection to 9/11, I say 'bring it on.' I think people will come to find it more and more distatsteful the more he does it. I also think his record of actions since then bears all the attention it can get, from his decision to tie our military down in Iraq, to virtually ignoring Pakistans role in the creation of the Taliban and the Nuclear black market, two things Iraq was not involved in, to the insulting, platry single hour he'll give the biprtisan committee investigating 9/11. He's spent more time than that dolling out ribs for a photo op. If that's the leadership he wants to draw attention to, I'm all for it.

E.) As a pre-emtive strike on claims of waffling, I refer you to W's positions on the inestigation of intelligence failures prior to 9/11, the creation of a department of homeland security, and a committee to investigate intelligence failures regrding WMD. All three of these things he opposed and thenb supported once it became clear the direction and speed the wind was blowing.