The Global Test
Kerry says Republians are "almost sad" and "pathetic":

They're misleading Americans about what I said. What I said in the sentence preceding that was, 'I will never cede America's security to any institution or any other country.' No one gets a veto over our security. No one.

And if they were honest enough to give America the full quote, which America heard, they would know that I'm never going to allow America's security to be outsourced. That's the job of the president.

So let's call his bluff. The full quote, helpfully provided by CNN also:

No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded -- and nor would I -- the right to preempt in any way necessary, to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do it in a way that passes the, the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

In spite of what he now says, I think what Kerry said then is pretty clear: He'll reserve the "right" to preempt, but the President has "got do to it" in a way that a) Americans understand why AND b) you can prove to the world you have legitimate reasons. Yes, he probably regrets having said that. But to say Republicans are spinning it is a bit ridiculous.

The truth is that he was, as always, trying to have it both ways -- He was trying to claim that he would both defend America "in any way necessary" and yet at the same time only when it's "legitimate" to the world.

A self-contained flip-flop!

I think he just can't help himself. In fact, James Taranto has a list of 8 others from the debate:

"I believe in being strong and resolute and determined. And I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever they are. But . . ."

"We have to be steadfast and resolved, and I am. And I will succeed for those troops, now that we're there. We have to succeed. We can't leave a failed Iraq. But . . ."

"I believe that we have to win this. The president and I have always agreed on that. And from the beginning, I did vote to give the authority, because I thought Saddam Hussein was a threat, and I did accept that intelligence. But . . ."

"I have nothing but respect for the British, Tony Blair, and for what they've been willing to do. But . . ."

"What I want to do is change the dynamics on the ground. And you have to do that by beginning to not back off of the Fallujahs and other places, and send the wrong message to the terrorists. You have to close the borders. You've got to show you're serious in that regard. But . . ."

"I couldn't agree more that the Iraqis want to be free and that they could be free. But . . ."

"No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But . . ."

"I've never wavered in my life. I know exactly what we need to do in Iraq, and my position has been consistent: Saddam Hussein is a threat. He needed to be disarmed. We needed to go to the U.N. The president needed the authority to use force in order to be able to get him to do something, because he never did it without the threat of force. But . . ."

Kerry seems to me to have a psychotic need to be on both sides of every issue, probably so as events warrant, he can easily claim he has stood for the one thing or the other. That may be good enough for Massachusetts, but I don't think it will be good enough for America on November 2nd. Americans want a President who will stand strong against enemies of all kinds -- bombers, hostage-takers, beheaders and yes, slayers of children.

- posted by The Dutchman @ 5:11:00 PM