Al Qaeda's endorsement means as much to me as a dog turd's endorsement does.
Well, Boortz seems to think merely claiming they endorse someone should mean people should vote for the other guy.
I was not suggesting you give it any more concideration than it is due, thing is Boortz is trying to make terrorism a matter of political partisanship and he is claiming that the terrorists want Kerry.
They say they want Bush.
Frankly I think both sides are full of it, but the Boortz article makes a plea to vote for Bush for reasons that are very dubitable.
I have a novel idea: how about people use their heads and make up their minds and not worry about who other numbskulls will vote for.
That way those who prefer Bush's policies can vote for him and those who don't can vote for the other dude.
Trying to marry a party to a side on the war on terrorism is silly as the parties are not on different sides on that issue. They merely have very
minor differences on how it would be prosecuted (mainly just differences in tone).