Sunday, September 26, 2004

NEWS ANALYSIS: Flip-flopping charge unsupported by facts

The question is not whether this is surprising to anyone or a new development and suddenly worthy of news attention, but WHY in the bejeezus it is reported so late in the game (what, like 37 days left until the election?) and why it hasn't been reported for 25 hours straight on CNN and FauX and MSNBC, etc., in exactly these uncompromising terms. I am grateful to the San Francisco Gate, but who's going to see this? And I'm not talking the 12 or so of us who will troll the web until we find news somewhere, anywhere, for the love of God. I'm talking Mr. and Mrs. "Bring Liberty to the Iraqis" in Iowa and Missouri and West Virginia. It's not like this worthy story is going to make the evening news. Heavens, no! Why would it?

I might wonder, too, why so-called Democrats can't articulate this in their mealy-mouthed "support" for Kerry on the blather shows. But that would be pondering the deepest mysteries of the universe, and we are not that deep here. Our quest is the shallow puddle that is American political enterprise.

From the article:

Kerry repeatedly described Hussein as a dangerous menace who must be disarmed or eliminated, demanded that the U.S. build broad international support for any action in Iraq and insisted that the nation had better plan for the post-war peace.

There were times when Kerry's emphasis shifted for what appear to be political reasons. In the fall of 2003, for example, when former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean surged to the top of Democratic polls based on an anti-war platform, Kerry's criticism of the president grew stronger. There are many instances in which clumsy phrases and tortuously long explanations make Kerry difficult to follow. And there are periods, such as last week, when the sharpness of Kerry's words restating old positions seem to suggest a change.

Yet taken as a whole, Kerry has offered the same message ever since talk of attacking Iraq became a national conversation more than two years ago.