The principal debate between George W. Bush and John F. Kerry, as framed primarily by Kerry at the Democratic National Convention, is about who best can be America's commander-in-chief.

Only one man has a record to run on -- George Bush. John Kerry has never been the commander-in-chief.

Kerry's best argument that he would make the superior commander-in-chief is based on his four-month tour of duty in Vietnam in the late 1960s -- a remarkably brief tour when most servicemen didn't rotate home until serving at least a year "in country."

As most Americans now know -- or certainly should know if they are paying attention -- Kerry requested release from his duty in Vietnam under a provision that allows disengagement for anyone who has accumulated three Purple Hearts.

Kerry qualified because he had three, even though all three were for minor wounds -- including one compared to the prick of a rose thorn -- that didn't require more than an hour or two of medical attention combined.

Nevertheless, his record qualified him for release from duty in Vietnam, and he took advantage of the situation.

Thousands of servicemen serving in Vietnam sustained injuries more serious than Kerry's and refused to accept Purple Hearts because they didn't consider their sacrifices to be worthy of that special recognition. The total truth about what happened to Kerry during his Swift boat service probably never will be known. A few witnesses say he was heroic and deserved his medals. Others, who were involved in the same missions and only yards away from Kerry's boat, say his "heroic" war status is undeserved.

But that's not the only measure of who can best serve as commander-in-chief. Kerry has a long record of votes on military issues in the United States, and it compares unfavorably with Bush's three-year record as the actual commander-in-chief -- under fire.

The confusion over Kerry's service in Vietnam is not in itself the basis to judge his fitness for command in the White House. But it is an important piece of the puzzle, and the fact that it is clouded is relevant.

His unwarranted attack on the integrity of his comrades after returning from Vietnam, his years of votes in Congress, and his recent statements about policies toward Iraq help complete the picture.

By comparison, Bush's record -- as our real commander-in-chief -- stands in sharp and distinguished contrast.

This article was published by The Duluth News-Tribune.