Mr. Webb. and hiskicks-

I love how opposition parties love to claim that their opponent is somehow "offensive" or "out of lines". The first amendment is not intended to protect uncontroversial speech. And yes, a majority of supreme court justices would certainly agree that, in this case, the wearing of army boots is political speech (see: Tinker v. Des Moine 393 U.S. 503).
This is like Green's response to Doyle when Doyle mentioned that most Wisconsinites property taxes went up, and that the average wisconsinite experienced a "x" percent growth, and oh Green, his property taxes went down.
Green claimed that it is "below-the-belt" to mention this. Yeah obviously he does. And if you are pro-Bush, then every anti-war rant is offensive. (The republicans that claim this are of the same party as the abortion protestors who, by blowing up photos of rarely performed, medical-necessity cases of aborted fetuses, try to mislead people about the real abortion issue. --Oh thats not offensive-)

Back to Mr. Webb.
Having served in the Military myself, (and still being up for activation until Feb 2008), I can tell you that whether Mr. Webb and his son disagree or not is not the issue. Mr. Webb isn't speaking on behalf of his son, he's speaking on behalf of his constituents, and clearly it is resonating.

Oh and do you think the cowboy boots aren't part of his opponents image, somehow the republicans are above political and media consultants and PR campaigns that dominate every other facet of american life.

Rock the boots. Rock the Vote.