It seemed pretty bizarre that John Kerry was portraying himself as pro-war and a strong defender of the nation

I felt like John Kerry distanced himself from the base of the Democratic party in his speech at the convention. I understand that a high percentage of delegates to the convention were anti-Iraq war. John Kerry, himself, built his career on his anti-war stance. I still hold his 1971 Senate testimony against him. I had not remembered that John Kerry was the speaker, but had vivid memories of the testimony about supposed warcrimes and atrocities in Viet Nam. They seem to have existed only in the imagination of John Kerry, although at least one account credited him as saying that he had committed some of the war crimes. Why doesn't John Kerry just run on his record? He is solidly anti-war, anti-defense spending, socially liberal, pro-Choice, friendly with Socialist governments and movements, in favor of all sorts of national liberation movements, and a natural ally to the French. He is of French ancestry, so what more could you ask? Supposedly, when he wants to communicate with his brother with reduced risk of disclosure while in public, he speaks French. Why pretend to be something that he is obviously not? Who is he kidding? Perhaps it is for Andrew Sullivan and Daniel Drezner, who obviously are looking for reasons to vote for him. Mickey Kaus desperately wants to vote for John Kerry, and I am sure would appreciate a better performance than John Kerry has given to date. Those to the left can always vote for Ralph Nader. Those to the center could always vote for President Bush.