"No matter how it turns out, for now the controversy over the documents has blunted criticism of Bush's Guard record, which has been a persistent irritant for Bush since he first campaigned for the White House. It has sapped the power from an issue that had appeared to be a weapon for the Democrats against Bush."
This paragraph is the most important one for the Bush campaign. The DNC/CBS+Boston Globe/Kerry campaign/probably Burkett failed in ATTACK 1 of the FORTUNATE SON campaign. There will be more strikes this week but the first one was not only a dud but a major backfire.
I don't care what revelation they come out with next they have lost all credibility.
I think that why CBS is not backing off... this was part of a coordinated DNC/ press offensive …. Think military if you just on a small local attack on you own and you have this big of SNAFU right of the bat.. you probably stop and regroup… but it you just part of the opening round of a major offensive you just have to gut it out… because the campaign has started and ther a overall game plan to meet… CBS is just part of a larger campaign… and too bad if they take casualties … that war and there sticking the course for DNC/ press offensive greater good
> which has been a persistent irritant
> for Bush since he first campaigned
> for the White House
I don't know, it seems pretty worthless as an attack on Bush in 2004. Because, unlike Kerry, Bush is a PROVEN leader. WHO CARES what he did early on? he was proven under fire after 9/11.
Kerry, on the other hand, has had a completely empty "career" as a senator (zero accomplishments, barely showed up, initiated nothing), and back in those days when he did actually ACT in public life, his actions were completely suspicious. Go meet with North Vietnam during a war?
Pretty desperate they must be to go after Bush on anything other than what he's done while in office, as that is by far the best indication of what he'll be like the next four years.
The subliminal message from the Dem convention was that you can trust Kerry on the WOT because he was a "war hero."
That was meant to elevate Kerry above Bush following two years of attacks on Bush's credibility as a "war president." It may have done so briefly (I even doubt that), but whatever Kerry gained from Vietnam in May and June is gone now. Instead, every new reference to VIETNAM reminds voters that Kerry "isn't quite right" on Vietnam, and therefore can't be trusted with the WOT."
This strat was a colossal blunder by the Dems, but the only one they could run on. They seem now totally oblivious to what ANY new charges---even against Bush---now subliminally imply. No matter what they say about Bush, the messages people here is this equation: "Vietnam . . . Kerry has problems with story . . . can't trust . . . Bush . . . never associated him with Vietnam . . . leader during WOT . . . can trust."
This game is over and has been for four weeks.