Brandon Staggs .Com

I thought this debate was a waste of time. Unfortunately, the President appeared to think so, too. He looked like he probably felt — annoyed and irritated to be debating someone so obviously inconsistent as Kerry.

Kerry did a fair job of appearing consistent on Iraq — that is, he managed to keep from contradicting himself too overtly during the debate. For this debate, Kerry decided to argue that Saddam was a threat, just not one worth doing anything about. That is opposed to his previous positions that Saddam was not a threat, and that Saddam was a threat and invasion was proper.

It was surprising to hear Kerry actually complain that our military is researching improved bunker buster bombs with nuclear components. Why he thinks we shouldn’t be pursuing improved weapon research is anybody’s guess, especially when terrorists have a habit of hiding deep inside mountains that conventional weapons have a hard time busting, but that is at least consistent with his Senate record of stifling military research.

When you get down to it, it is ludicrous of Kerry to be arguing that the war was the wrong war, but that he is somehow going to magically bring in more countries to help us fight that “wrong war at the wrong time.” I suspect he knows that’s absurd. Say anything to get elected…

Kerry argued for unilateral preemptive action against Iraq:

“‘We know we can’t count on the French. We know we can’t count on the Russians,’ said Mr. Kerry. ‘We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it’s in our national interest.’ “

This is interesting, because today, Kerry is complaining about how the US supposedly shrugged off France, Russia, and Germany; and that we need their help. He’s also arguing that it was wrong to preemtively attack Iraq. Perhaps in 1997 things were different — after all, Clinton was president, and 9/11 hadn’t happened yet. Why he would become more dovish after 9/11… Well, whatever way the wind blows for your core constituency, I guess.

The CBS report of a memo which supposedly shows Bush’s Guard service was dishonorable is getting quite a beating. First of all, the documents appear likely to be forgeries: see here and here. All indications are that the documents were done in a modern word processor — quite a feat for something supposedly written thirty years ago.

But what is more important here is the blatant bias this shows of Dan Rather and CBS. They have latched on to evidence that is, at best, highly suspect. Unlike real journalists, they totally ignored the problems with the ‘evidence’ in their report. Further, while there are plenty of people who are still alive and served with Kerry, CBS doesn’t care what they have to say when they criticize Kerry. But suspicious documents written by someone who isn’t alive? Great! As long as it hurts Bush…