Baloney for President

Is it my imagination or did Senator Kerry just shoot his presidential campaign in the foot?

As reported in today's New York Times story Stumping Bush Calls Kerry a Reluctant Ally on Iraq:

Mr. Bush and allies seized on Mr. Kerry's remark of Monday that he would have voted to grant authority for the war even if he had known no weapons of mass destruction would be found. The Republicans said the comment amounted to what they described as another shift in position by the Democratic presidential nominee and an acknowledgement that administration policy on a crucial national security matter was correct after all.

The consequences of this remark are enormously negative for the Kerry campaign. For instance, this week's Newsweek has Kerry's aides alleging that the president isn't spending enough on homeland security because "the areas facing the biggest threat—the corridors connecting Boston to Washington, Chicago to Detroit, and Seattle to San Diego—vote Democratic." Obviously, the notion that Bushitler is deliberately trying to get millions of Democratic voters destroyed by terrorist attacks is ridiculous. But would Kerry still have voted for the war on Iraq given all that he knows now about how much safer Americans would be if the monies required to prosecute the war were spent on homeland security instead? Only Senator Baloney can seriously accuse the President of willful neglect of American security by making a rush to an unnecessary war and argue that he's A-OK with giving the President that war authority because he believes it's the right authority for a president to have.