I just ran across this video and I thought it was worthy of sharing here.

In the middle on the right of the page, click the documentary "watch now" link.
http://www.kerryoniraq.com/

media player http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/RNC091604.wmv

quicktime
http://real.stream2you.com/rnc/RNC082304.mov

I think this was already posted here. That is if it is the video that chronicles the ever shifting position of this complicated man on Iraq.

The impression I got was that he supported the war for taking out Saddam, but not for WMDs. He did a bad job of answering it, but that's just the impression that I got.

It's far more indepth than that. Kerry has been all over the spectrum on Iraq. Not just over years but over the span of two days, as well.

Why is it the two people who are running for governor of my state are making commercials in which they say what they will do to make the state better, but the two people running for president can't stop sinking their claws into one another and telling how the other screwed up? National politics has stooped to the level of Jr. High drama.

it says right in there a couple times he is scared of saddams wmd's that he uses on his own people because if it ever came to using them on iran or kuwait or even israel it would mean a huge disaster. Kerry flip flopped over and over and over just to make some people happy. I personally believe he still does support war in Iraq but is 'playing the field' as it were in order to make Bush look like more of an enemy.

I think that during a time of war like this, it would not be smart to put someone else in office who especially is against the war (that is, opposing everything about the war, and opposing the reason why we are in the war), and if he is against the war, cannot have a strong reason why he is against the war. It is even worse that he "flip-flops" as to why is he is or is not against the war. I would rather have someone who is strong in their opinion, and unless I see otherwise, is seemingly doing the right thing to the best of his abilities. If Bush goes totally out of line, then I'll go for whomever is against him probably, but I just don't think this is the right time for an undecisive president, regardless of what bush may or may have not done correctly, he knows most of his faults (IMO, more or less) and is doing the best he can to patch things up.

So someone that ploughs bullishly ahead and sticks steadfast to their initial belief, disregarding everything and everyone else, they are more preferable to someone that constantly re-evaluates the situation, reconsiders all the options and is constantly questioning himself to make sure he is doing the best thing?

Stubbornness and pigheadedness are not qualities. Humility and open-mindedness are.

I don't know whether this applies to Kerry precisely, but I've seen lots of people hinting at "oh well, Bush made a stupid decision but at least he's stuck firmly to that decision, never accepted it might have been stupid and never accepted anyone hinting that it was stupid, and this is a good thing!".
If Bush just went out and said "Okay, so invading Iraq was a mistake, and they were not an immediate threat to the United States, but we're going to stay in Iraq to correct our mistake", I think that would land him a lot of respect. It would from me, anyway.

A leader that uses a common sense approach and applies logic to a situtation seems much better than one that just sticks firmly to initial beliefs.

Mort, politically he can't do that. It would end up as nothing more than a sound bite for his opponent to use against him. Here is my fundamental disagreement with your premise though. I believe that the case was made that going to Iraq was the right thing to do for a miriad of reasons. I believe his opponents focus on two things to discredit this. One, that no WMDs were found (or at least not in the manner expected) and, two, that Iraq (probably) wasn't directly involved in 9/11 (which was never a reason anyway). The opposition almost acts like these were the only reasons we went to Iraq when that is a falacy.

That's all fine when we understand that there is basically an "anybody but Bush" mentallity but Kerry both opposes and supports the war routinely. He is incapable (more like unwilling) to take a consistent position.

It's sad that that's the case. I was jsut talking to about that with one of my firends earlier today. I'm disgusted with the whole presidential election

What have I missed? Sure there are alot of crappy anti-Bush ads out there but other than that this all has seemed pretty tame.