Gore is taking a huge gamble every time he opens his mouth with negative commentary about the Bush administration, the same administration that has magnificently carried this nation through the tragedy of Sept. 11. Gore is hoping the president and his advisers are incorrect in their assessment of the danger brewing in Iraq; he is hoping we do not succeed in the imminent strike against Saddam Hussein, so when the time comes to launch another presidential campaign, he can say that he was right about Iraq, and Bush made a mistake. Mr. Gore, Americans are starting to do research, and your rhetoric is not fooling us.

Back in April of 1991, Gore said that the elder President George Bush was not to blame for not further pursuing Saddam Hussein.

He claimed, "I want to state this clearly, President Bush should not be blamed for Saddam Hussein's survival to this point. There was throughout the war a clear consensus that the United States should not include the conquest of Iraq among its objectives. On the contrary, it was universally accepted that our objective was to push Iraq out of Kuwait, and it was further understood that when this was accomplished, combat should stop."

In 1998 while on Larry King Live, Gore proclaimed, "If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people. So this is a way to save lives and to save the stability and peace of a region of the world that is important to the peace and security of the entire world."

Now, four years later, Gore has done the typical liberal reversal, and is trashing Bush for trying to remove Hussein from power. We have 3,000 families torn apart at the hands of terrorists, so why is there a problem now in the pursuance of the removal of terror threats from the world?

Does anyone realize that even if we are wrong about a nuclear threat from Iraq, the worst thing that could possibly happen via military action is that we would have a dead, maniacal dictator? Mr. Gore, stop playing politics. Let the president produce the results you called for in 1998.

Daschle, who called upon Bush to seek permission from Congress before striking Iraq, is now in a bind. Bush went to the United Nations out of common courtesy to the international community, and he answered Daschle's call.

The leader of the free world has asked Congress to pass a resolution that would give him the option of a military strike on Iraq, and although the House of Representatives quickly responded with a vote, Daschle and his liberal friends on the Hill are now playing politics and doing everything they can to postpone the vote until after the elections in November. Heaven forbid the voters should see how the candidates would vote on a pressing issue that requires immediate action.

Mr. Daschle, be a man. Every political move you have made in the past few weeks has been shoved so far down your throat, I find it hard to believe you can still actually manage to pollute this planet with your agenda. You have American homeland security in your hands; Republicans and many Democrats are ready to take the vote. Stop the partisan nonsense.

Vote on the resolution now, and let the president continue to protect our nation the best way he can.

In a press conference Sept. 25, Daschle issued the following statement: "I hope that the administration, the president, will listen carefully and will respond appropriately. This is too important to politicize; this is too important to minimize. The only way to do this is to do it the way his father did it: build the international coalition, build a coalition in this country, reach out, make the case, but for heaven's sake, don't politicize it."

Well, Mr. Daschle, you have once again shown your hypocrisy. The president is not the one playing politics. You are. Additionally, if anyone actually applied a little effort, they would discover that back in 1991, you voted against Senate Joint Resolution 2 in Jan. 1991 after Hussein invaded Kuwait. Who do you think you are fooling by calling on Bush to act in the same manner as his father, whom you never supported in the first place? Daschle has also claimed funding this war would be too expensive ¯ when has Daschle ever been concerned with spending our tax dollars?

Americans and increasingly more Europeans, especially the British, are beginning to realize the tremendous threat Iraq poses to the United States, its surrounding neighbors in the Middle East and the international community. It is time to stop talking and time to take action.

Senator Daschle, we already have 3,000 dead Americans; how many more must die before you will take action? How many more press conferences can you hold before you realize we have a problem on our hands?

You continue to demand apologies when you should be the one delivering them. Stop the hypocritical, politically motivated games, and take action.

This game of political quibbles must end. The majority of Americans see a threat in Iraq, and they want action. We need a vote on Bush's resolutions. Now.

Some Democrats in the Senate do not want to take the vote, because they are afraid of what the voters will think.

America is watching, waiting and closely monitoring how our representatives are behaving. Maybe now we can count on them to make the proper vote.