NYTimes - Talking Sense, at Last, on Iraq

[rndmprsn]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/21/opinion/21tue1.html

After weeks of politically damaging delay, John Kerry finally seems to have found his voice on what ought to be the central issue of this year's election: the mismanaged war in Iraq and how to bring it to an acceptable conclusion.It was none too soon. While the fate of the Iraqi people, the success of the war on terrorism and America's international standing have all been teetering ominously in the balance, Mr. Kerry has allowed the presidential campaign to veer off into squabbles about events long past - like the candidates' 30-year-old war records - and about Mr. Kerry's confusing and sometimes contradictory recent statements on foreign policy.

Speaking in New York yesterday, Mr. Kerry laid out a well-grounded, intellectually straightforward and powerful critique of the Bush administration's past mistakes in Iraq. He gave a coherent explanation for his vote two years ago to authorize President Bush to use military force, making a clear distinction between how the White House should have used that authority to maximize international pressure against Saddam Hussein and the self-isolating course it actually followed. And, for the first time since becoming a presidential nominee, he explicitly said that he would never have supported the invasion of an Iraq that did not possess weapons of mass destruction.

...Perhaps the presidential campaign is finally under way.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

1. "the presidential campaign is finally under way"

Indeed it is. Much to Bush's dismay.

[Catfight]

2. I would love for Kerry to say, Weapons of Mass Deception! But

he won't, but it'd be nice to hear in the TIMES.

[Sparkly]

3. Glad the NYTimes gets it, because AP et al are feigning confusion

'Kerry says he wouldn't have ousted Saddam,' according to Ron Fournier. It's more complicated than that, of course.

And Chimpy pretends Kerry said all sorts of thing he didn't.

Kerry's statement on Letterman, too -- explaining that vote for authorization wasn't a vote for mishandling it -- was good to see, as well.