* Like others, I always raise an eyebrow when the terror alert is raised. It always seems to happen when there is bad news for the administration or good news for Kerry. Is it politically motivated? Who knows?
What strikes me is that no reporter asks the obvious question: Explain the process under which the terror level is raised. Who has input? Who makes the final call? Is it the President?
Remember a couple months ago when Ashcroft called a press conference to discuss a new terror threat and Ridge didn't even know about the press conference? Makes you wonder. Don't hold you breath to see if any reporters ask how these decisions are made.
* This is from the Sunday NY Times about the President's plan to attack Kerry in August.
"Mr. Bush's aides said they were determined to use the weeks ahead to highlight Mr. Kerry's 20-year record in the Senate, using votes he has cast and what they described as his lack of accomplishments to portray him as ineffective, ideologically out of step, and a slacker for missing crucial votes while campaigning.
"He has 20 lost years," Mr. Dowd said. "It's amazing." Mr. Kerry's voting record - he has cast more than 6,000 votes in all - has long been considered vulnerable by Democrats and Republicans, not just because it can be characterized as liberal, but also because it is so vast and touches on so many complicated and politically fraught issues over so many years."
I love Dowd's quote, "He has lost 20 years." I thought he was referring to GW Bush from his post-college years to when he quit drinking. Let's see his accomplishments over those two decades: may have gone AWOL, busted for drunk driving, ran a bunch of businesses into the ground, and traded off his family name.
If I was Bush, I'd try and lose those 20 years too.