John Podhoretz says that Kerry's political instincts are the Bush campaign's secret weapon.
The other day, Kerry said: "After being warned about the danger of major stockpiles of explosives in Iraq, this administration failed to guard those stockpiles -- where nearly 380 tons of highly explosive weapons were kept. Today we learned that these explosives are missing, unaccounted for and could be in the hands of terrorists."And, once again, Lurch won't come within a mile of a reporter with the stones enough to ask him why he's obsessing over a few hundred tons of explosives thats status is unknowable when the entire country of Iraq remains one gargantuan ammo dump where hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives have been secured and destroyed by our soldiers. Is Kerry saying that those particular explosives are especially dangerous? Why? Because some of them ---HDX/RDX--- have nuclear applicability? Hmmm. If those aren't weapons of mass destruction, they certainly qualify as hyperactive cousins.
Kerry has just bollixed up his own storyline about the war in Iraq. He is concluding his campaign by drawing an explicit association between Saddam Hussein, dangerous weaponry and international terrorists.
That's Bush's argument. Not Kerry's.
Kerry's account of the past 18 months is that Saddam's weaponry wasn't sufficient grounds for invasion and overthrow. After all, he said in the first presidential debate, "35 to 40 countries in the world had a greater capability of making weapons [of mass destruction] at the moment the president invaded than Saddam."
But in thundering about the vast danger posed by 380 tons of high explosive, Kerry is sure making it sound like Saddam possessed uniquely dangerous weapons.
So why are such dangerous materials still around? Because Blix and el-Baradei didn't want to deprive Saddam of his sovereign right to own explosives that he might have needed for mining or whatever the excuse was. And these are the people John Kerry trusts more than his own government or military. Pathetic.