Support the Troops. Give Them A Commander in Chief Who Respects Them.

What's the most ridiculous phrase uttered in public in the past ten years?

"I support the troops."

It means absolutely nothing and it is a distraction that prevents U.S. citizens from discussing policy.

The Bush administration loves to use that argument -- that the free flow of ideas will somehow discourage our armed forces -- to squash our constitutional right to disagree or debate the administration's policies. Yes, George W. Bush leads an administration touting democratic freedom around the world while he would rather there be limited free speech at home. That would be akin to saying it is bad to discuss labor and trade issues because it might discourage ironworkers.

So..."I support the troops" becomes the tagline -- and a meaningless one. Given that these very same troops are ill equipped in battle, even our own Pentagon and White House do not, in various ways, support the troops.

The truth is: Nobody except a few nutcases will ever wish ill upon our soldiers. But plenty of smart people disagree with Bush's poorly planned policies that are fiscally and diplomatically destructive. Such illogical plans put American soldiers in harm's way.

So if you want to make that phrase truly meaningful, if you want to sincerely "support the troops", translate that support into being a proponent of an administration that values their sacrifices with careful planning and longterm vision.

That would not be the Bush White House. Senator John Kerry is certainly the better choice as one who understands diplomacy as it emanates from the top to the foxhole.