George W. Bush-America's Greatest Presid ent

“yeah i got one thing to say about him he is a piece of f*ckin sh1t because he thinks that tearing up or contries natural parks and forest is ok cause he thinks he can cause he is a f*ckin piece of sh1t”

“Tell us how you really feel....let it out.


Personally I would vote for ANYONE other then Bush.I don't really like Kerry that much, I just dislike Bush that much.”

“Bush was a liar long before he became president. He continuously lied to the people of Texas, before he started lieing to the people of the USA, and then the rest of the world. If you look on infowars.com , you can find many instances of his lies, plus his family ties to Hitler before and during WW2.”

“I don't feel that Kerry will be anything other than Bush. I do feel a great need to get that Bush/Cheney bunch of self-serving wacko's out before they bankrupt & destroy us completely.”

“grampa - So you're not voting for Kerry either? He obviously lied about Vietnam, and now he's trying to use Vietnam as his platform. Of course, I suspect you are ignoring the facts about what he said about Vietnam as compared to what the facts are uncovering. Am I wrong?”

“"Am I wrong?"

Quite.”

“The evidence is very strong that the swift boat veterans for [hiding] truth are much farther from the truth than Kerry. One of the anti-Kerry Swift Boaters has already admitted lying, another never challenged the version of events recorded on his own Bronze Star award (which support Kerry's version of events), and the people closest to the events support Kerry - and new witnesses with no axe to grind keep coming out in support of Kerry's version of events.

Did Kerry pump up something a little? Maybe. Did he get any details wrong? Probably. But the big picture is way closer to Kerry's than to the Kerry basher's version.”

“BTW: The Bush abortion story is kinda interesting, it might make a great novel. I have no idea what the truth here is, and I certainly would recommend against anyone basing their decision to vote on something so unsubstantiated and so far in the past.”

“grampa and cats, you guys sum it up nicely.”

“Are the (not so)Swift guys saying that Kerry awarded himself medals?

I didn't know one could do that.”

“violin - "quite" is quite convincing.”

“http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-lips27.html

The Navy is investigating Kerry's claims now.”

“Have Someone Else Say It

By John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, AlterNet. Posted August 28, 2004.


Bush & Co. used the old "third party technique" with their Swift Boat attacks on Kerry. The technique is simple: "Put your message in someone else's mouth that the public will listen to."

One of the differences between liberals and conservatives in the United States is that liberals tend to see politics as a debate over issues and policies, whereas conservatives view politics as "the continuation of war by other means." The recent attacks on John Kerry by the GOP-front "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" is a fine example of this philosophy in action.

There is an old saying that "all's fair in love and war," and this is certainly true of the communications strategies employed by propagandists engaged in war, whether it be actual battlefield combat or political warfare. Consider, for example, the leaflets that airplanes drop on enemy soldiers, telling them that they are fighting in a lost cause and will die unless they surrender. Maybe this is true, maybe not. From the point of the propagandist, the question of whether it is true doesn't really matter. The point is simply to influence the behavior of the enemy soldiers who read the leaflets.

Similarly, there is very little reason to believe that the Swift Boat veterans and their handlers seriously believe the charges that they have recently made against Kerry's conduct as a soldier in Vietnam. Swift Boater George Elliott, author of an affidavit publicly criticizing Kerry's conduct and the merits of his Silver Star, is the same man who, as Kerry's commander, recommended him for a Bronze Star in 1969 and wrote several evaluation reports that praised Kerry as "highly courageous in the face of enemy fire," someone whose "independent, decisive action" was "unsurpassed," and "the acknowledged leader in his peer group. His bearing and appearance are above reproach." Roy Hoffmann, another Swift Boater and harsh Kerry critic, also seems to have conveniently forgotten his praise back in 1969, when he wrote glowingly that Kerry had provided a "shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy."

The Swift Boaters' main grievance against Kerry has nothing to do with his actions in Vietnam but rather with Kerry's public opposition to the war after he returned to the United States. But even in this regard, the Swift Boat Veterans are fighting a war against the truth, not for it. They resent Kerry for having testified before Congress about war crimes committed in Vietnam by U.S. soldiers, but the historical record is quite clear that war crimes were committed. (Kerry gave his testimony shortly after Lieutenant William Calley's court martial for the My Lai massacre.)

The point to all of these attacks is not, as the Swift Boat Veterans pretend, concern for "the truth." Rather, they are engaged in a propaganda campaign aimed at influencing the behavior of a "target population" – in this case, voters.

The Swift Boat attack on Kerry uses a classic propaganda tactic: have PR professionals organize and launch a well-funded smear attack, an ad hominem barrage against Kerry's integrity, and do it through a front group with enough separation from the Bush campaign to pretend independence. Then use the right-wing echo chamber to keep the issue alive and churning, spitting plenty of mud and confusion. It's a strategy that is virtually guaranteed to hurt Kerry in the polls.

What seems surprising is that the Kerry campaign was so unprepared for this attack, especially since this has been a standard tactic used for decades by Bush's political mentor, Karl Rove. According to Dallas Morning News political writer Wayne Slater, "It's amazing how similar this type of attack is to the pattern of attacks I have seen over two decades - in some cases involving Bush's campaigns, in other cases they involved campaigns in which Karl Rove was a participant. In every case, the approach is the same: You have a surrogate group of allies, independent of the Bush campaign, raising questions not about the opponent's weakness but directly about the opponent's strength. In every case, it works."

One example of this strategy occurred in 1994, when Bush first ran for governor of Texas against Ann Richards. The Bush campaign benefited then from a seemingly "independent" whisper campaign criticizing her appointments of gays and lesbians to state positions, thus turning one of her greatest strengths - the inclusiveness of her administration - into a political liability.

During the Republican presidential primary in 2000, other "independent" Bush supporters ferociously attacked John McCain (another Vietnam veteran in the U.S. Senate), questioning McCain's commitment to veterans. Yet another front group, calling itself "Republicans for a Clean Environment," spent $2.5 million (covertly provided by Dallas billionaires Sam and Charles Wyly, investment bankers and friends of Bush) to run TV ads in California, Ohio and New York attacking McCain's environmental politicies. Bush distanced himself personally from the attacks on McCain while letting the "independents" do his dirty work for him – the same stance he has taken recently with respect to the Swift Boat attacks on Kerry.

The attack on Kerry is merely the latest incarnation of this standing Bush strategy. The Swift Boat Veterans even use some of the same personnel: people like Merrie Spaeth of Spaeth Communications, a public relations professional with deep Republican ties who served as the spokeswoman for "Republicans for a Clean Environment"; Benjamin Ginsberg, an attorney who represented the Bush campaign during the 2000 Florida recount debacle and was also counsel for the Bush 2004 re-election campaign; and Chris LaCivita of the DCI Group, a Republican lobbying firm with ties to Karl Rove.

The "third party technique" is a standard PR tactic, and is at the heart of the Bush campaign's successes. As one PR pro describes it, the technique is fairly simple: "put your message in someone else's mouth" – the mouth of someone the public will believe, or at least who will be believed sufficiently to influence the opinions of your "target audience."

We examined the third party technique at length in our 2001 book, "Trust Us, We're Experts!" The technique offers several advantages for the propagandists out there:

Camouflage:

It helps hide the vested interest that lurks behind a message. If George W. Bush were to come out himself and attack Kerry's battle record in Vietnam, the message would be quickly dismissed, and in fact would backfire in light of Bush's inability to prove that he even showed up for National Guard duty back when Kerry was patrolling the Mekong Delta. By putting the attack in the mouths of Vietnam veterans, the Bush campaign has given its message a degree of credibility that it would not otherwise enjoy.

Emotions Over Facts:

It replaces factual discourse with emotion-laden symbolism. Sometimes the identity of the third-party messenger becomes more important than the content of the message itself. The Swift Boat Veterans are designed to symbolize "veterans versus Kerry," evoking associations and emotions that are difficult to address through logic or debate. For the Bush campaign, evoking these emotions provides a welcome distraction from rational discussions about policies on health, the environment, the economy or foreign policy.

None of these attacks would work, of course, if the news media did their job and provided careful fact-checking to help separate fact from fiction. Professional journalists are supposed to act as information filters as well as information providers, but their ability to do this has been undermined by the 24-hour news cycle and the orchestrated propaganda campaigns of the right-wing echo chamber – the combined voices of websites such as the Drudge Report, right-wing talk radio and Fox News – which work in concert to push Republican talking points into the mainstream media.

What's needed, therefore, is some new way of filtering the news by exposing the propagandists behind the scenes who manipulate the news. If traditional media aren't doing their job, perhaps the Internet can help the public do it ourselves.

A year ago we launched a new website to help track front groups. We call it the "Disinfopedia." Among other things, it is an experiment in citizen journalism, using web-based "wiki" technology that invites visitors to not just read the information they find there, but to also edit and add to it. Our online editor, Bob Burton, helps us root out vandal attacks and misinformation, as does a growing community of online journalists who use the Disinfopedia.

John Kerry was slow to respond to what he eventually branded a "front group" for Bush, but the Disinfopedia wasn't. By the time "Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth" started to make front-page headlines with their dishonest attacks on Kerry, Disinfopedia contributors had compiled an impressively detailed article about the group.

We like to think that the Disinfopedia is one reason why, unlike cable TV, the print reporting on this topic has been relatively good. Journalists who start with a Google search for "Swift Boat Veterans" will see the Disinfopedia link at the top and have the opportunity to avail themselves of the research on that page.

When the Swift Boat Veterans story exploded in August, we thought it was interesting to see how the right wing responded to the Disinfopedia. Since anyone can contribute, conservatives attempted to edit the article along with everyone else. Rather than fact-checking or adding new facts, however, most of their contributions consisted of trivial attempts at vandalism, such as deleting facts that they found embarrassing or even deleting the entire article and replacing it with profanity, insults or invitations to worship Jesus.

These vandalisms are easy to fix, since the Disinfopedia keeps a history of each editorial revision. What the experience demonstrated, though, is that when a forum like the Disinfopedia requires contributors to present evidence and logic in support of their political positions, right-wing attackers are left helpless. They have become very good at waging political war, but they've forgotten how to engage in civil discourse. There will always be propaganda and deception, but Disinfopedia is proving a powerful tool for getting to the truth.”

“Hey Sarge - You might want to think twice before accepting stories from the Chicago Sun Times at face value.

Chicago Sun-Times Restates Circulation
Hollinger International Inc.”

“I know this aint the answer but:

I hate bush he is a f*ckin scum bag!!

I hate Kerry he is just to damn liberal and i hate democrats

Why cant like there be a liberatarian out there than can pull something off!!

Less government is what i want!”

“Participation on this board has tripled in the past couple of months or there are a lot to trolls loitering about.”

“OK Sarge. I did a little research.

The article is correct. Kerry's DD214 does list both a Bronze Star and a Silver Star with combat "V".

According to www.homeofheroes.com, it is not worn on the Silver Star as that would be redundant. Obviously, whoever prepared that form made a mistake which disqualifies Kerry from the Presidency. *eyeroll*

As far as the claim in the story that "None of the other services has ever granted a Silver Star "combat V," either", this story only ads to the confusion.

Thanks for bringing this very important issue to our attention.”

“As much as I think a third party is great, and I did vote for Harry Brown in the last election, I don't think Libertarian is what this country needs. Our government can be fixed without completely dismantling. Most of it's programs benefit the poor and middle class based on an unfair taxation of the wealthy and business. Things would be in horrible disrepair if our central government had very little strength.”

“Most of it's programs benefit the poor and middle class based on an unfair taxation of the wealthy and business.

Yeah. That's why they're wealthy: Because the odds are so stacked against them. And the poor are actually greedy.”

“The wealthy will still be in control but I can't say that our country would be better off without welfare, unemployment, food stamps, highway's, public education, etc. The list goes on forever really but the government is not what is bad. It's the schmucks we've chosen to run it.”

“Aug. 27, 2004 | Another bombshell in the battle over Vietnam service that has been raging in the 2004 presidential race exploded on the Web Friday. In a video originally posted on the Web by a pro-Kerry organization in Austin, Texas, Ben Barnes, a former lieutenant governor of Texas, apologized for his role in getting a young George W. Bush into the Texas Air National Guard while young men who were not from prominent or wealthy families "died in Vietnam."

"Let's talk a minute about John Kerry and George Bush, and I know them both," said Barnes in the video, which was filmed at a gathering of about 200 Kerry supporters in Austin on May 27. "I got a young man named George W. Bush into the Texas National Guard when I was lieutenant governor, and I'm not necessarily proud of that. But I did it. I got a lot of other people in the National Guard because I thought that was what people should do when you're in office, and you help a lot of rich people."


"And I walked to the Vietnam Memorial the other day," Barnes continued, "and I looked at the names of the people that died in Vietnam, and I became more ashamed of myself than I have ever been, because it was the worst thing I ever did, was help a lot of wealthy supporters and a lot of people who had family names of importance get into the National Guard. And I'm very sorry about that, and I'm very ashamed, and I apologize to you as voters of Texas." ...”

“Violin - the issue is not whether or not somebody made a mistake putting it on the form. The issue is that John Kerry put it on his website as one of his accomplishments. I am glad to see that instead of resorting to an ad hominem attack you decided to take it a step further and research. I'm also glad to see that your research found that the article was correct.”

“We're all glad that you're glad.”

“I'm glad that you're glad that I'm glad.”

“I hate it when it gets all warm and fuzzy around here......”

“it's mold”

“<snip>
After weeks of denigration of the Democratic challenger's Vietnam war record, Mr Kerry's backers have responded with allegations against the President - including the claim that he was once photographed in uniform wearing a medal ribbon he had not earned.

As polls showed that Mr Bush had edged ahead of Mr Kerry for the first time, a pro-Kerry organisation labelled the President an "impostor" over the photograph, taken in 1970 and discovered in his father's Presidential Library in Houston, Texas.

The ribbon is an Air Force Outstanding Unit Award - which was not awarded to the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron in which Mr Bush served until 1975, five years after the photograph was taken, according to the group US War Report.

"Why is this fraud important? Because it betrays the Honour Code that every officer learns and carries throughout his or her career," said Walt Starr who investigated the medals for the group. Separately a new book, Deserter, by Ian Williams, a British-born author, challenges the President with details of how he used his father's influence to join the Texas Air National Guard as a trainee pilot, thereby avoiding service in Vietnam, and then allegedly disappeared from his base without fulfilling his duty.

"Bush has set himself up, and now that the issue is coming up he is going to have to answer questions on his own documented record," said Williams.

Williams's book offers evidence that Mr Bush stopped training in 1972, and failed to take an annual physical examination demanded of all pilots. Deserter also claims that Mr Bush failed to turn up for duty in Alabama, an omission which could have resulted in a charge of being absent without leave, or even desertion.
<snip>
Full Story”

“brOk3n! Dude its obvious that you have issues. I think that before you start ranting and raveing about all the things you hate "which no one really gives a chit" you need to take a long hard look at yourself.”

“WILMINGTON, North Carolina (CNN) -- Democrats spent the first day of the Republican National Convention making sure the nation heard President Bush.

Just in case you missed them, there were two quotes in particular that Democrats want you to hear.

The first came from an interview Monday morning with NBC's "Today" show. Bush was asked whether the war on terrorism can be won.

"I don't think you can win it," Bush responded. "

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/30/dems.daywrap/index.html”

“Violin, is it possible for you to make a point in a few sentences without some extensive cut & paste? I would actually be interested in understanding the BASIC POINT your lefties are trying to present, but you need to learn some communication skills. Get to the point...don't waste everyone's time with #$%@# that is "filler" detail, let us know what it is you're trying to say.

If it's not worth it to you to summarize, don't try to dazzle us with your cut & paste abilities, we're not impressed.”

“"President Bush sees world terrorism for the evil that it is," said former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the night's final speaker.

Too bad for us that Bush didn't "see it" on or before 9/10/01. Wasn't even on his radar screen before 9/11.”

“USA, you're correct... G-Dub being God's second born son, you'd think he would've known.”

“usa - What are you saying there? That Clinton didn't see terrorism for the evil that it is and therefore he gets your free pass that he didn't "see it" before it happened in '93 and 2000?”

“wanderer - Is it possible for you to do something here besides snipe at others? I can't recall you ever offering your opinion or taking a firm stand on any issue except that you are better and smarter than the rest of us. It's getting old man.”

“Clinton warned Bush about terrorism, and Bush was disinterested and changed the subject.”

“the twins cracked me up tonight”

“I love the terrorist arguments. Let me get this straight. Terrorists strap bombs to the their chest in an unorganized manner regularly in Israel and blow up malls, bus stops, etc., but in the U.S. we've been miraculously saved by a color coded system of bullschnit and minimum wage security guards? I'm not buying it. Something fishy is going on and I pin it on the CIA. Wasn't Bush Sr. the director of the CIA at one time? Hmmm.....”

“Coherence please?”

“President Bush looked pretty Presidential last night. The entire convention is running like a well oiled machine. Arnold was hilarious. You girly-men who are bashing the President's economic policies, better watch out. Arnold is back!”

“Questions About Bush's Guard Service Unanswered




By Dave Moniz and Jim Drinkard / USA TODAY

WASHINGTON - At a time when Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has come under fire from a group of retired naval officers who say he lied about his combat record in Vietnam, questions about President Bush's 1968-73 stint in the Texas Air National Guard remain unresolved: (Related item: Bush urges end to TV attack ads by outside groups)

Some of the documents about President Bush's military service documents still have not been made public.

• Why did Bush, described by some of his fellow officers as a talented and enthusiastic pilot, stop flying fighter jets in the spring of 1972 and fail to take an annual physical exam required of all pilots?

• What explains the apparent gap in the president's Guard service in 1972-73, a period when commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama?

• Did Bush receive preferential treatment in getting into the Guard and securing a coveted pilot slot despite poor qualifying scores and arrests, but no convictions, for stealing a Christmas wreath and rowdiness at a football game during his college years?

The White House has released hundreds of pages of records, but the files released so far haven't answered those questions. Since the documents were released in February, at least a half-dozen news organizations, including USA TODAY, have filed new requests for Bush's military records under the Freedom of Information Act.

In an e-mail to USA TODAY last week, presidential spokesman Dan Bartlett said: "The president has authorized the release of his records and we are complying with all requests. Some are taking longer than others, but all will be addressed."

Past military service and qualifications to be commander in chief have become a central theme in the 2004 presidential campaign.

Questions about Bush's record predate the current campaign. The apparent gap in his Guard service first surfaced before the 2000 election, when The Boston Globe reported that Texas Guard commanders were unable to account for Bush's whereabouts from May 1972 to April 1973.

Bush has not said what he did in the Guard during that period. Aside from a statement by a former Alabama Air Guard officer who said he saw Bush report for duty there in the fall of 1972, the only evidence he was at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Alabama was a record of a dental exam on Jan. 6, 1973, at the base.

Bush said in a TV interview in February that he would make all his military records available. That month, the White House released more than 400 pages of Bush military records, including some duplicates, and said the documents were a complete catalog of his personnel files.

But some documents still have not been made public. The White House did not release Bush's medical records from his Guard files but allowed a group of reporters who cover the White House to review them for 20 minutes. They found nothing unusual. Kerry released some of his military records earlier this year. He has also declined to release his complete medical records but showed them to reporters as Bush did.

Since February, the White House has banned all Guard and military commanders outside the Pentagon from commenting on Bush's records or service. Requests for information must go to the Pentagon's Freedom of Information Act office.

The Pentagon last week responded to a 4-month-old request from USA TODAY for additional records from Bush's files by sending another copy of documents that were released by the White House in February. The documents do not address the unexplained year in Bush's Guard service or his decision to stop flying.

The Associated Press filed a lawsuit this summer requesting copies of Bush's military records stored in a Texas archive on microfilm. It sought information that might explain why Bush did not take his flight physical and whether he showed up for duty in Alabama in the fall of 1972, AP spokesman John Stokes said.”

“Bush Prays, and Is Prayed for, Say Republicans
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
OTHER
Interactives:•2004 Convention PackageSTORIES
•Changing Times Reflected in 2004 GOP Platform•Hastert, Frist Play Bit Parts at Convention•Daschle Defends Bush Hug •Contract With America Overlooked at Convention•Cheney, Miller on Tap at RNC•Closed-Door Rally for Religious Conservatives•Democrats Courting Secular Voters
NEW YORK — President Bush (search) prays, he consults scripture; he even plans services on Air Force One when he isn't able to attend church on the ground.

So says a new documentary that points out that yes, Bush is a religious man, and many of his core supporters find that one of his most endearing traits.

"I think what they like about this man — and what seems to scare other people — is his faith," said David W. Balsiger, producer of "George W. Bush: Faith in the White House." (search) "For a large segment of the voting population — probably 60 million — faith plays a very large role," Balsiger continued. "They want to know that the man will make some decision through prayer, through spiritual counsel."

Polls seem to support that assertion. The Pew Forum on Religion and the People (search) polls have repeatedly found that a majority of Americans like their political leaders to talk about their faith, a statistic that the Republican Party has seized upon in the last year.

Another statistic they have seized upon is one that has found that the more frequently voters go to religious services, the more likely they are to vote Republican.


And though the Christian conservative (search) movement is hardly marching in full force on the Republican National Convention, Republicans of faith are easily found in New York this week, and make no bones about saying that Bush is one of them.

"I think our president is a Christ-centered, Godly man and he is a leader for times such as these," said Pearl Floyd, an African-American Christian, who serves as a county commissioner in Gastonia, N.C.

Floyd has had the pleasure of meeting the president on several occasions, she told FOXNews.com at the GOPAC-sponsored "National Prayer Breakfast" Wednesday morning. "He calls me Pearl and says he's my friend," she said.

White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, who spoke at the event, said Bush is "someone who prays every day," and people constantly approach him, here and abroad, saying they are praying for him.

"I hear it everywhere in America," he said. "That is the greatest help this president gets, it's the prayers from you."

Balsiger said he expects more than one million DVDs of his film, which documents the role of faith in the president's life and in his leadership, to be in circulation in the next few months, and he hopes it will "go head to head" with the DVD release of Michael Moore's anti-Bush documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" on Oct 5.

"It ended being a great tie-in. It provides a great alternative for people who want to know what George Bush is really like," he said.

"The main mission (of this film) is to show a side of George Bush that says he is different from other contemporary presidents. He's not reluctant to talk about his faith," Balsiger said.

Aside from distributing the film through secular channels like Wal-Mart, Balsiger said it will be available at thousands of churches, religious organizations and bookstores. It will also be shown at several film festivals between now and the election.

"A lot of religious believers are asking whether their leaders are just pandering to the beliefs of people or are they really walking the talk," he added. "I think this film indicates that he does walk the talk."

But while folks like Balsiger and others, like former Oklahoma Rep. J.C. Watts (search), who led the prayer breakfast Wednesday, say faith is key to the party, this aspect has hardly been high profile among the major events and speakers at the convention this week.

Experts suggest that convention delegates, part of Bush's loyal base, know who they are going to vote for, and much of the convention is geared toward targeting more moderate swing voters who identify with economic and national security issues rather than religious and social issues linked more closely to the conservative wing of the party.

"I think the difference is in the past, the Christian conservative base wasn't happy with the nominee, and they were dissatisfied with the party, so the party had to reach out to them," said John McLaughlin, Republican pollster.

"This president has their support and right now their objective is to register more conservatives and make sure these conservatives go and vote, and that's going to happen," he said. "They're not complaining, you're seeing them lining up and saying, what do we need to do? On the other hand, the party understands that we're battling for the middle right now."

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, a life-long Roman Catholic, has said he is also a man of faith, but has contended that faith is a personal matter and that he does not want to be a spokesman for any church or faith.

At the same time, Democrats say attempts to appear centrist at the Republican convention don't disguise the true nature of the conservative right.

"Underneath a thin veneer of compassionate slogans, there's a divisive, negative agenda that is driving the Republican Party and has controlled this White House and their policies for the past four years," said Mary Beth Cahill (search), campaign manager for Kerry. "The Republican Party has miscalculated again if they thought they could keep their true extreme agenda under wraps while middle class families have been suffering from it all along."

Democrats held their own prayer reception at the Democratic National Convention, albeit a smaller one. They said faith has been "hijacked" by Republicans, and their issues of faith include opposing war and eradicating poverty.

"Our faith has been stolen and it's time to take it back," said Jim Wallis, a Christian activist who runs "Call to Renewal" in Washington, and appeared at the Democratic prayer breakfast in Boston.

"Democrats are clearly extremely frustrated by the idea that religion is equated with conservatives," said Steven Waldman, founder of BeliefNet.com, a Web site dedicated to religious issues, at the July convention. "And they're flailing around, trying to figure out what to do about it. The Democrats know they have to be more welcoming."

Gene Riccoboni, a Manhattan layer who considers himself a traditional Catholic, said his faith surely plays a role in his political support — and Bush is his man. He likes the fact that faith helps to guide Bush's decisions as a leader.

"Personally, I would prefer a man of faith," he said. He believes that most people who consider themselves religious can be found on the same side of political issues, like abortion and stem-cell research. "It's ideological," he added.”