It’s high time the front-runner was sat down and peppered with serious questions about what his policy now is. The Washington Post yesterday ran an excellent editorial dissecting Kerry’s record of dizzying, shall we say, nuance:
In 1991 he voted against the first Persian Gulf War, saying more support was needed from Americans for a war that he believed would prove costly. In 1998, when President Clinton was considering military steps against Iraq, he strenuously argued for action, with or without allies. Four years later he voted for a resolution authorizing invasion but criticized Mr. Bush for not recruiting allies. Last fall he voted against funding for Iraqi reconstruction, but argued that the United States must support the establishment of a democratic government.
Mr. Kerry’s attempts to weave a thread connecting and justifying all these positions are unconvincing…
To say the least. I’d say his vote against the $87 billion is a huge liability in the coming campaign. Kerry needs a serious proposal on Iraq that isn’t designed purely to attack the Bush record. So far, I haven’t seen one.
THE ZARKAWI LETTER: Whoever wrote it, it fits completely with the atrocities now being inflicted on Iraqis trying to rebuild their country.
The Dish 