The other day I was watching TV & remember seeing a political speech of sorts, given by a child. Though I may very well be wrong, I *think* it was from the Democratic National Convention.

At any rate the child made a comment about a recent epithet used by Vice President Cheney. Her statement was something like: "The Vice President used a word that if I would have used it, I would have gotten in trouble..."

This was in reference to the VP's use of the 'F' word. Immediately after she said this, I remember the entire audience breaking into applause, in a sense agreeing with her.

When this happened my jaw nearly hit the floor. The only thing I can think is that a short term memory comes with the territory of politics.

If some of you aren't sure what I'm referring to, imagine a group of hopeful Democrat nominees at the end of 2003. Then picture John F'ing Kerry giving an interview to Rolling Stone magazine, in an attempt to entice young Americans to his side.

During this interview Kerry purposefully used the 'F' word in anti-Bush tirade...

So the question comes to mind of which is worse, if you can actually claim that one of the two is. I'm sure some will read this & say that the manner in which the term was used by Cheney was much worse than the context of Kerry's interview. However, keep in mind that he said this with every knowledge that millions of Americans, some of them very young, would read this all over the country...

The VP on the other hand made a rash remark directed at an individual who was being a pain in the neck... His reasons for using it were similar to the reasons Teresa Heinz Kerry told a reporter to "shove it"...

So when this all boils down, I don't really see how anybody could argue that the VP's words were any worse than anything Kerry or Heinz have done on the record...

Something tells me if this child used the terms both Kerry & Heinz made, she wouldn't be in any less trouble...