Dear Muckraker Wannabees and People Who Probably Gawk at Auto Accidents (as well as other vicariously interested parties),

I usually don't respond to the literally hundreds of scandal-mongering, one-sided, bullying, snide, e-mails which purport to know and be willing to conspiratorially share with me the "real truth" about the person running for elected office, which they portray as the alien antichrist of the moment. I fear that responding will just encourage them, but a recent e-mail I received moved me enough (ticked me off enough) to do so.

Furthermore, please be aware that the views expressed herein are those of the author and are not meant to imply that stumps, the trees they were originally derived from, or (in fact) any members of the tree family in any way whatsoever sanction, bless or otherwise approve of either the content or sentiments expressed in this page. All comments are solely the views and expressions of the author. No members of the tree family were harmed in the creation of this innocuous treatise.

Since I fervently maintain my stance as a political Independent, I was not angered from a partisan standpoint because it attacked John Kerry. I was equally disgusted a couple of weeks ago when Dan Rather stated as absolute fact that President Bush had been a military slacker and claimed to have proof of favoritism and evil doing.

It was just because it was the one straw too much on this camel's back of someone beating their chest and stating loudly, without benefit of citing irrefutable facts, that (fill in the blank with a candidate's name here) was unworthy of drawing oxygen from our "globally warmed" and dwindling supply of shared oxygen.

I would not be remotely surprised to receive an e-mail tomorrow detailing "hard evidence" that either Kerry or Bush (or possibly both together as part of an intricate, alien-sponsored conspiracy) had indeed been hidden on a grassy knoll in Dallas in late November of 1963 and taken potshots at John F. Kennedy.

This stuff is as absurd as the headlines on the tabloids in the supermarket that say Ross Perot and Ralph Nader are gay lovers who spend their weekends at Neverland Ranch with Michael Jackson dressing in some of J. Edgar Hoover's old frocks that they bought off E-Bay while cooking together from a personally autographed Martha Stewart cookbook - complete with grainy pictures of the whole sordid mess.

Using the bully pulpit of e-mail, the crazies leap up to mount their $9.95 a month stumps and are sprouting like zits on a cheeseburger obsessed teenager's chin. Even so, I am now joining in the fray because I feel that I am being called by a higher power to so something to help rid the world (and my inbox) of the daily ping pong match.

So, here I am, spouting off myself - read at your own risk. By the way, you are getting this either because you were on the original list that I was on *OR* because I wanted you to know that I was thinking of you fondly (maybe) when I wrote this.

While neither I (nor you) probably know if any of this very official sounding stuff in the mud-slinging author's message is true or false, here's a few points to ponder?

The author of the email that moved me to write this, a Dr. Jack Wheeler, purports on his website (yes, I looked him up) to offer "The Oasis for Rational Conservatives" and "The Pro-America, Pro-Capitalist, Pro-Western Civilization Intellectual Ammunition Service for Defenders of Liberty" That is quite large load for one man to carry - even such a self-acknowledged scholar and expert as Dr. Jack. Regardless, I am curious about these questions.

(1) Was Dr. Jack Wheeler a member of Kerry's Swift Boat crew?

(2) Did he serve with John Kerry and was thus privy to his activities in the service?

(3) Does he offer any proof (other than yapping like this which (I assume) he feels must make us mere mortals think it to be true) that John Kerry a) inappropriately tried to leave the service early; b) ever got or was considered for anything other than an honorable discharge; or c) didn't actually EARN a Silver and a Bronze Star Medal and THREE Purple Heart Medals in tribute for his bravery while serving in Vietnam?

(4) Does he consider it dishonorable to be a decorated veteran who served his country well and who then exercised the right of ALL FREE AMERICAN citizens to let his voice of dissent be heard?

(5) Does he feel it likely that in the ensuing many years as a US Senator, these allegations would likely have already risen to the surface before if they were based on anything resembling the truth?

(6) Finally, did he similarly rise four years ago in outrage and self-righteous indignation when then Texas Governor and Candidate George W. Bush refused to "dignify or discuss" his admitted previous problems with alcohol and alleged problems with drugs when he ran against Al Gore (who, by the way, actually WON the popular vote in the previous quadrennial candidate roasting festival).

I personally assume that both Bush and Kerry are just people like you and me - probably with good (hopefully even wonderful) intentions, but also flawed just like you and me and who, just because they are running for our nation's highest elected office, are proper subjects for the most vociferous (word used correctly here I believe) criticisms that we can drum up.

The EFYDAYS (Every Fourth Year Disgusting American Yelling Spectacles) are here and we are all invited to holler. I, for one, feel that all of the personal attacks serve mostly to humiliate those who wage them, even as they attempt to denigrate ANYONE who would serve - unless, of course, they happen to espouse the "party line" of the author's choice - assuming that they even know what their party actually does stand for - a blurry distinction at best.

Here's reality - if a candidate is a criminal - prosecute and jail him or her. However, if there is no solid proof that they are lawbreakers, why not call on them to clearly and articulately tell you (and me) what their REAL plans are (not sound clips, buzzwords and Photo Ops) to answer some of the questions below. How about we at least discussing what ought to be the REAL issues of the Presidential campaign?

Such as ...

Just where are those weapons of mass destruction lurking that Bush and Cheney now admit were actually not there at all (OOOPS?) and whose existence were used as the main justification for GOING TO WAR? We actually attacked another country, killed a whole bunch of people and continue doing so today, under the banner of saving the world from Saddam Hussein's chemical and nuclear weapons that didn't exist.

Also, just how IS the economy doing? I believe the latest (possibly correct) figures are that we've gone from a $5+ Trillion Budget Surplus to a $2+ Trillion Budget Deficit in only four years - but what's a few bucks here and there among friends, right? Regardless of how much a trillion dollars really is (and I assume that is a really, really big room filled with silver Halliburton briefcases full of lots of freshly printed money) that seems like a lot of money to be leaking out of somewhere. If the purported cost of the now seemingly ill-conceived war is stated as being "only" in the billions (a somewhat smaller, but still pretty fair sized room filled with silver Halliburton briefcases full of lots of freshly printed money), then I'd like to know what happened to the rest of the loot.

Maybe we spent it on some really cool and valuable stuff like big screen TVs, Play Stations IIs and more of those way cool stealth bombers, but I think that an explanation is really in order. I know that if I lost a proportionally large sum of money (in my case probably something like a empty Crackerjack Box with a dime rattling around in it), I would certainly like to know why my kids would then be working on street corners washing car windows for clothes money and picking up soda cans to trade for food. Just explain what happened - it's probably a good explanation.

Oh yeah and while they are at it, where did alleged missing millions in Iraq rebuilding dollars go that were being managed by Halliburton and why is Mr. Bremmer now being attacked only twenty four short hours after saying we didn't have enough troops on the ground to do the right job in Iraq? Coincidence? Not likely! Surely we had the money to afford to pay more troops if they were necessary.

By the way, if it was all based on bad intelligence data and bad accounting, I would assume that Monster.Com will soon be jam-packed with resumes of out of work CIA and GAO employees by the thousands. I am sure they can come down south and find immediate work picking up the remains of what used to be lots of people's houses or loading sandbags to protect against rising flood waters caused by the 117th hurricane / tropical storm of 2004 that was, of course, in no way caused or effected by global warming but did provide great photo opportunities for candidates to pose with debris and homeless, crying people ... but, I digress.

Warning - Completely Personal Opinion Follows:

Is the world better without Hussein in power in Iraq? As far as I know, Absolutely! He was apparently (from what I read at least) a very, very bad guy. It appears that Kim Il Jung in North Korea and the Mullah of the week in Iran are (at the very least) also on the very bad guy list. We should all be most displeased that both of these less than stable governments are now working with nuclear (or nuk'-U-lar as some in power pronounce it) capability and that both now have demonstrated ICBM delivery capability.

Does this mean that these two alleged producers of evil with clearly demonstrable weapons of mass destruction or programs to make same should now be targeted as the next conquests by our armed forces. I hope not and that we can maybe find a way to deal with them that does not involve gunpowder, missile propulsion and blood.

Here's the huge question that MUST be answered - Was it right and justifiable for the United States to invade Iraq and remove Hussein only on the "premise" that he had chemical or nuclear weapons? In retrospect - absolutely not! Before you even ask - YES, I too was in support of what we were doing when I was told that Iraq had nukes and chemical weapons and was happy we'd gone in to rid the world of the bushy-eyebrowed bully. But I, for one, was apparently very WRONG - DEAD WRONG!

We all bemoan and lament the terrible tragedies of the American families who have lost sons and daughters in this latest war. Virtually every hometown newspaper has run a story about a bright and promising life extinguished too early in this war on terror and documenting grieving parents who greeted a casket with their former baby in it as it arrived home for the last time. That is heart wrenching and I can only imagine (with the fear only a parent can feel) the inconceivable pain they must feel at this worst possible time in their lives.

However, as you fervently sympathize with those poor sad parents in Peoria and elsewhere, I would also suggest that you should also remember those parents falling to sleep tonight in Iraq who are mothers and fathers who also loved THEIR dead children. They too have experienced the same emotions described above and be aware, we've killed far more of their kids than they have of ours. All of these kids were killed in the war on terror and were called into the battle not because they hate Americans, but because they were soldiers in Hussein's army when their country was attacked. Soldiers defend those they fight for - that's what soldiers are supposed to do.

Even worse - some of these parents lost children because they simply had the misfortune of being too near one of our very own weapons of localized destruction when it fell from the sky unannounced. Remember, we don't send out messages that say, "Excuse me and oh, by the way, we'll be bombing in your area this afternoon, please remove all non-combatants." How would you feel if you were awakened this morning by the shattering experience of having the front of your home (where your precious children were sleeping peacefully) being blown into a million small (dead) pieces? I suspect, you be rather unfavorably disposed to whoever extinguished the lives of those you loved. Is it any waonder why anti-American sentiment runs rather high in the combat zone?

Did any of these kids need to die or did they die for a good reason? That's a very hard question to answer. The answer would seem to be ... maybe not right now. Would weapons of mass destruction ultimately have been created in Iraq? Most likely. Saddam Hussein would probably have been delighted to have a few really destructive bombs to lob over towards Israel and maybe a few more to export to ports in Newark, NJ or San Pedro, CA, hidden, un-inspected in a container marked as DVD players from Korea. But is "likely to have" and "would have if he could have" a valid reason for starting a WAR and spending millions of dollars every day it continues - emphatically NO!

Is going to war with the nations with nuclear capability the best way (or the only way) to secure our freedom? I think not. The problems are far too huge to be solved by battles unless we are willing to deal with global nuclear war. That just might just take care of it. Is war ever justified? Though that too is a hard question, in my opinion, the answer (even allowing for the admitted bias of male testosterone) is yes. If your family or country is attacked and your chosen way of life is in jeopardy, then you must be willing to fight back to defend it.

The key word is DEFEND. Generally, that means someone is already attacking you. Did the Iraqis hijack and fly the jets on 9/11? No, that was (apparently) sponsored by the ever-popular, country hopping, catch me if you can, Mr. Bin Laden. Remember him - tall guy, long scraggly beard, doesn't speak English and looks pretty ugly in a dress.

We were chasing him like a pack of crazed wolves after 9/11 and hopefully still are but we must have gotten bored because we didn't catch him and need to move on to more fertile theater of action. Maybe we are like bass fishermen who say, "OK, no fish here, pull up the anchor and let's try over there like maybe in Iraq."

One other observation about war, even if you are indeed right in your cause, it is very hard to say that you successfully convinced your adversary that you were indeed right if they are indeed dead. We have to find a better way to help mitigate and eliminate the problems that cause the zealots to incite and the soldiers to fight. People are being killed daily all over the world (including here in the good old USA on 9/11) by people willing to sacrifice their lives in what they must feel in their hearts is a holy quest to attack the infidels.

By the way, if you are keeping score, WE are the infidels they want to rid the earth of. They see being a suicide bomber as a valid career choice and a life well-lived. Their deep spiritual belief allows them to await their promised reward (I believe a certain number of voluptuous virgins are rumored to be the prize for martyrdom) in a glorious afterlife after making such an ultimate sacrifice. I doubt that attacking their capitals, knocking down their bully's statues and defacing the evil one's pictures will make that stop. Nor will torturing them in prisons.

I would submit that economic sharing and rapid education are the only real and valid long term solutions to these massive problems. It will take far more effort than a war - it will take mind changing - away from thousands of years of ingrained historical hatred and prejudice - ours, theirs and everyone else's. But it must be done or the long term will continue to look just like it looks today and it's actually getting worse quickly - not better.

Realize that only money separates terrorists from massive killing weapons and remember that it's not just nuclear and chemical weapons we need to worry about. Delivery trucks filled with fertilizer bombs or vans with drums of gasoline ignited by a firecracker are known to have an amazingly devastating impact.

The United States is now seen as a global invader (wearing a Stetson hat), looking for control of the only thing important to us in this area ... OIL. Just how far wrong is that viewpoint?

I am sure that every one who reads this probably considers themselves to be a good person. Does it scare or worry you that just because you can actually get into your car and drive to Disneyland, a big part of the world's population hates you and wants you dead? If you have any doubts, go watch a few of the horrific beheading videos circulating on the Internet - that ought to help sensitize you to the way we are reviled. It should indeed cause you deep concern and motivate you to demand that anyone who is running for office explain in detail exactly how they intend to mount a winning effort to help the world genuinely move toward peace and global economic cooperation.

What is your chosen candidate's plan for bringing the nations of the world together to deal with such issues as famine and AIDS in Africa. Yes, AIDS is STILL an epidemic and just because the rich can mitigate it's death sentence with drugs - children in Somalia and Kenya and the poor side of Cleveland die daily from AIDS without anyone to care for them because they are NOT rich - and they usually die hungry. What about "religious" territorial disputes, global warming, increasing elimination of the world's forests and coral reefs and the safety of the world's water supply?

How about key domestic issues such as the fact that average senior citizen has to, in some cases, break our laws just be able to afford to get the drugs that keep them alive. Why should we have to make it LEGAL to get drugs shipped in from Canada - they are made LEGALLY in the USA, but cost too much here. Isn't that just INSANE? Drug companies ought to be able to (or be forced to) lower the prices charged for these same drugs here in the lower forty eight states.

That seems like a well-reasoned alternative to making them in Philadelphia; shipping them to Ontario; where they are distributed to Francois in Quebec who hands them to a UPS guy who then drives them to the Montreal Airport and flies them to Memphis and hands them off to another UPS delivery chain that ultimately delivers them to Aunt Sally in Sunshine City - adding even more TOTALLY UNNECESSARY EXPENSE - which STILL leaves them cheaper than Aunt Sally can buy them for at Walgreen's in the Sunshine City Strip Mall. Something is BADLY WRONG here!

How about education? IS no child really being left behind? That is a nice catch phrase, but what are we doing to make teaching a desirable profession for those best able to educate. Our economy encourages many of our best and brightest thinkers to start small businesses or seek jobs in great corporations like Enron and Halliburton where the dream of massive wealth is sure to follow. Only those with a heart for teaching and a willingness to take a vow of income mediocrity pursue it these days. That is also wrong.

What about the elderly? Why must the end of their proud and well-lived lives be filled with the abject fear that one day soon they will run out of money, not have enough to pay for medicine and end up broke, with broken spirits and hearts, in a Medicare-funded nursing home staffed by people who don't know how to pronounce their names. Can't we do something to make them secure, unafraid and safe. It's what we say we are always trying to do for our kids - are our parents less worthy?

Taxes? For starters, how much does the Federal Government REALLY need and is what they spend being used productively to actually make our lives better. What is it being used for? Real accountability would be a nice and quite revolutionary idea. If the federal government's bureaucracy did less to stifle, monitor and control and more to encourage excellence, we'd need less.

People who sit behind federal desks that move and sift paper from one box to another day after boring day would probably be more productive if they were challenged to and had the ability to actually make a difference and were rewarded for performance as opposed being rewarded for just getting older, thus attaining tenure and seniority which usualy begats complacency and apathy. How about our arcane and hopelessly convoluted personal income tax system? Does any average citizen have a prayer of actually understanding the documentation that accompanies their annual income tax submission forms? Nope!

This election ought to be about discussing the issues - not just about salivating like a pit bull in a butcher shop and instantly seeking the exposed throats of anyone crazy enough to subject themselves and their families to a microscopic view of their lives and the yammering, carping, wacko criticisms of the zealous, jealous and vociferous (there's that word again). Let's hear from our candidates about issues - not innuendo and "he said - she said" gum-flapping.

I bet you have even better questions you'd like answers to - ASK THEM, but please don't ask if they swiped a piece of gum from their best friend's five pack of Juicy Fruit back in 1958. I just don't care - nor should you.

Pick the person to cast your ballot for on a valid well-reasoned and hopefully well-informed basis. If that doesn't sway you one way or another, I would then suggest making your choice based on who has the best looking hair or which one you'd be most likely to buy a used car from.

Have a great fall season and don't forget to vote.

Oh yeah - my name is TIM YANDELL and even though I am not (currently) running for elected office (nor away from the sheriff), I have approved this message (since I wrote it) :-)

P.S. If you have now read MY whole yammering, carping, wacko diatribe and want to drop by and throw eggs at my house, bring it on.