And they're off - it's the traditional Labor Day-to-Election Day run to the finish line of the presidential race. We're getting lots of letters on the issues.

OK, let's hear it

With now less than two months before the election, the presidential campaigns will be kicking into high gear for the traditional post-Labor Day stretch run, and our readers are among the most sought-after voters in the nation. So, your thoughts, please - we'll publish as many letters as we can about the race. Your letter will have the best chance of appearing if it's brief, sticks to the issues and is original. We'll favor newcomers over frequent contributors. All letters must include a phone number for confirmation. E-mail us at letters@enquirer.com; fax to (513) 768-8430; or send to Letters, the Enquirer, 312 Elm St., Cincinnati, OH 45208.

Bush has plan that is best for America

I believe in President Bush. He has not lied about his past, personal or public, nor tried to cover up anything. I believe him because he wants America to be safe for all people. I believe he truly will make the economy better for all people if they are willing to follow his plans. I believe he stands for what he believes in, and has the courage to follow his convictions for the betterment of the people of this country and the world.

He is a man of giving dignity and respect to all.

There is more to be accomplished, and together with Bush as our leader we can do it.

Shirley Kadon
Loveland

The presidential election is, as usual, silent on what many consider the serious issues; the highly irreverent rhetoric between the two main candidates is an insult to the American people's intelligence. I would enjoy hearing open, nonpartisan, intelligent and informative discussion on:

• Free trade, the positive/negative future aspects, and possible solutions.

• Debate on the $7 trillion debt; and how we are going to pay it with the debt-based Federal Reserve notes?

• The near-hysterical efforts of certain congressional members to trash the Second Amendment.

• The restoration of our lost Constitution and Republic.

Richard L. Banks
East Price Hill

It's time to start talking about future

John Kerry talks about Vietnam and George W. Bush talks about 9/11. And what's worse, the news media report and discuss every word of it, ad nauseum. At some point, can we get around to talking about the future?

Larry Markham
Loveland

Criticism of candidates goes both ways

Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer opines that Democrats have become "quite unhinged" in criticizing President Bush, the textbook case of pot/kettle hypocrisy ("Democrats losing - their wits, too," Aug. 27). I suppose that as Krauthammer remembers it, Republicans were nothing but gracious and professional toward Bill Clinton. Not to suggest that an eye for an eye in the political discourse is the way things ought to be. But let's not pretend that the vitriol originated during this presidency. Krauthammer says Michael Moore, I say Rush Limbaugh. He says Al Franken, I say Ann Coulter. And so on and so on.

Rick Landrum
White Oak

We are less safe than we were in 2001

From what's been said at the Republican Convention, you would think there had been no 9/11 Commission, with all the references to the war in Iraq as the War on Terror to avenge the World Trade Center bombings.

What an insult to the memories of those who lost their lives on that terrible day. The war on Terror should have been concentrated in Afghanistan until Osama bin Laden (remember him?), al-Qaida and the Taliban were truly vanquished. Then there should have been a concentrated effort, with our allies (when we still had them) to hunt down the terror cells in Europe and the United States. Instead, we take our $200 billion in tax dollars and sink it into Iraq.

We are certainly not safer than 2001; if anything we are less safe.

Nancy Gack
Anderson Township

Miller isn't the only alliterative thinker

Regarding the article "Cheney goes on offensive" (Sept. 2): After reading Democrat Zell Miller's description of candidate John Kerry at the GOP convention "'wrong, weak, wobbly"), it would appear that Zell's a zealot who knows just about zip.

Richard Ellison
Anderson Township

'Girlie-men' comment insensitive to needy

I heard California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger comment at the Republican National Convention that those of us who are pessimistic about the economy should not be economic "girlie-men."

I dare him (or President Bush or any Republican) to sit across the table from 10 of the 1 million people who have lost their jobs - or of the 3 million additional people who have gone into poverty, or of the 4 million people who have lost their health insurance under this administration - and call them to their faces "girlie-men." Some "compassion" they have - getting a good chuckle at the millions of people who have suffered economically under President Bush. Here's the Republican attitude: "Boo-hoo. So you don't have a job. So what?"

Yes, we're "crybabies." My two babies are crying because they'll also be the ones paying for the $2 trillion additional debt that Bush has run up in the last four years.

Thomas Bartman
Montgomery

Purple Hearts are symbols of valor

The contributor who wrote, "Some Marines reject Purple Heart award" (Sept. 1) argues, in an obvious dig at John Kerry's Vietnam service, that some Leathernecks reject the award because "they were not writing a political resume for future use." My brother Floyd, who fought with the First Marine Division in World War II, was quietly proud of his two Purple Hearts for wounds suffered on Okinawa. He insisted that one wound was a mere scratch, but if pressed would admit that the same mortar round killed two of his buddies. At a memorial service for Floyd in January, we mounted the old Marine's Purple Heart in a place of honor. We did it not because he was "writing a political resume" fighting in the Pacific, but because it demonstrated that he - like Kerry - was ready and willing to serve when his country needed him.

Don Bedwell, Marine veteran
Madeira

Takes issue with Purple Heart critic

As son of a retired Marine Corps veteran, I must wonder at George Quirk's the letter writer's comments ("Some Marines reject Purple Heart award," Sept. 1). The intent of the letter is obvious - to again slander the record of John Kerry, who put on the uniform of our country to fight on foreign shores and who continued to fight once home against improper oversight and care of his brothers still in battle in Vietnam. Later he fought for veteran's benefit reforms, new programs, and the safe return of POWs and MIAs. For all this he is scorned. But the writer's comments go past slandering John Kerry and seem to paint Purple Heart winners as cowards for accepting an award considered by the armed services as meritorious.

In the rush to score partisan political points, the writer aims too wide, making some vets eligible for another purple heart, this time from friendly fire.

Rob Averbeck
Western Hills