This nation and this world cannot withstand 4 more years of a "divider"..

[kentuck]

Yes, he came into power pledging that he was a "uniter, not a divider" but he has divided this nation and our allies as no leader in American history. This is the issue that must be addressed before the election in November. The next leader must unite this nation. He must bring together Democrats and Republicans and heal the wounds that have been thrust upon our friends around the world.

Yes, he plans on using the "division" to capture another 4 years in the White House. However, that would be the most unwise decision that the American people will ever vote upon. Our nation is in turmoil and cannot stand 4 more years of Mr Bush's divisions. We must become united or else there will be a high price to pay in the future. The Democratic candidate must make an effort to unite this nation and draw a contrast upon the divisions created by George W Bush. We are at a crossroads once again.

[jbfam4]

1. Well said, Kentuck

[kentuck]

2. We need to think about this as a legitimate issue...

IMHO..

[ninkasi]

3. Absolutely right

Kentuck, you are 100% correct. I have never seen this nation so divided, and I was born during WWII. As a Texan, I knew Bush would be bad, but I wrongly hoped that our Democratic party would at least try to curb his more destructive actions.

This country, and the whole world, can't begin to heal until he and his gang of thugs are voted out of office. This current one is the most corrupt, arrogant, greedy bunch who have ever held office.

[forgethell]

4. Do you really think that

a Democrat will be any more successful than * as a 'uniter'?? Think again. We are not divided because * hasn't reached out towards the Dems. We are divided because we DISAGREE with the positions of the other party. And they will be divided from us, if we win and try to advance our agenda.

[kentuck]

6. I don't think Bush even made an effort...

Considering the way he was put into the office, he did not have to push his rightwing agenda. He didn't give a damn. He is a divider on purpose.

[forgethell]

7. Could be

but he had to shore up his base. However he got in office, well, there he was. Having been elected, or apponted, or anoited of God, take your choice, why would he then adopt all the points of his opponents?? People run for office to accomplish certan goals that they have in mind. Now, I'm not saying that his goals were noble, but however he did it he WON, if you define won as getting the Presidency.

If Sen Kerry succeeds in becoming President, do you think he will immediately adopt conservative views to be a 'uniter'? Don't hold your breath. And the conservatives will howl, just like the Democrats have been doing.

More importantly, in my opinion, we have taught them how to use the Senate to obstruct the other guys agenda, and if you think they are going to forget, then you have an extremely pretty pair of rose-colored glasses.

Still, it's better to be in than out, all things considered

[kentuck]

8. There is such a thing as winning a mandate for change...

Are you saying every election is a mandate for change? No matter if you didn't even win the popular vote, you have the right to put the entire nation on a different path? I think I like that. No matter what, if the Democrat wins, he has a mandate to roll back taxes, to pass healthcare reform, and to initiate any or all social programs this country may need. Of course, we know what the Repubs will say and do, right?

[CityZen-X]

5. Bu$h*t Needs 4-More

So he can restore this country to what it once was-
a barren frozen tundra of a wasteland, inhabited by cave dwellers!