The Commander's Codpiece

40° 44' North; 73° 55' West

The venerable grey lady of American journalism, the New York Times, finally managed to free herself from the knots in Judith Miller's pantyhose last weekend.

As a result, the Times' editorial writers got their fists loose just long enough to take a poke at the Commander's Codpiece.

And they damn near scored a direct hit:

"President Bush and his surrogates are taking their re-election campaign into dangerous territory. Mr. Bush is running as the man best equipped to keep America safe from terrorists - that was to be expected. We did not, however, anticipate that those on the Bush team would dare to argue that a vote for John Kerry would be a vote for Al Qaeda...."

".....This is despicable politics. It's not just polarizing - it also undermines the efforts of the Justice Department and the Central Intelligence Agency to combat terrorists in America......The people running the government clearly regard keeping Mr. Bush in office as more important than maintaining a united front on the most important threat to the nation...."

"....It is fair game for the president to claim that toppling Saddam Hussein was a blow to terrorism.....It is absolutely not all right for anyone on his team to suggest that Mr. Kerry is the favored candidate of the terrorists."

Which begs the question - why?

Why would Mr. Bush's entire campaign hinge on his pushing the "I am the Only Protector from Perpetual Terrorism" angle?

Clearly, based on his statements in tonight's debate, this is not Dubya's top of mind issue. In fact, despite being given numerous opportunities Bush would not go there because he had no interest in enunciating the name of, well, 'He who will not be Named'.

Instead, it's all about polls. And John Zogby, the Dean of US polling, who does not do Gallup-assisted Republican-biased sampling, hits it on the head.

"While the overall numbers remain unchanged, there are some revealing cross-tabulations. Kerry continues to lead on four of five top .....but the President has widened his advantage over those who cite the war on terrorism to a 56 point lead -- 75% to 19%."

In other words terrorism is the only political capital the Mr. Bush and his brain Karl Rove have left.

Now, ever since the Neandercons wrote the "Project for a New American Century" they've wanted a leader to be in this position because they consider perpetual war to be their ticket to ride.

And until tonight's debate between Mr. Bush and his rival Mr. Kerry I thought they might be right.

But then along came Shrub who, in his own mangled syntax, told us that... he himself is confused about the distinction between Saddam Hussein and 'He Who Must Not Be Named'..... that, the atrocities at Abu Graib prison notwithstanding, he would still like to put his twin daughters on leashes..... that his strategy for dealing with North Korea relies on help from that paragon of democratic choice, China.....that he is in favor of Vladimir Putin's recent anti-democratic policy changes....that he knows who AQ Khan is.....that he knows that it was the other AQ that attacked America... that he knows what noookuleer means....and that "I.... know..... the way...... the world works.......I just do."

So now that the American people have seen how incoherent Mr. Bush's thoughts on both realpolitick and terrorism truly are, will that 75/19 spread become an albatross around his neck?

Here's hoping.
______

Update: Sat Oct 02/04:

Interesting bit of post-debate flash polling from NY Newsday by way of the American Bodhisattva had this very interesting nugget:

"Better plan for fighting terrorism: Kerry 81.0%, Bush 19.0%"