Kerry's team did a nice job of keeping the news media off of John Edwards, and on the spat between Bush and Kerry. However, they had a bit of a rough go on substance, as we see from the Times:
Mr. Kerry also accused the Bush campaign of planning a barrage of negative advertising against him and asserted that Republicans had even given it the name "Operation Carpet-bombing."
"Now, you go figure," he said.
But Mr. Racicot, who called Mr. Kerry "particularly prickly" yesterday, flatly denied Mr. Kerry's accusation. He said no one at the Bush campaign had referred to its advertising plans that way, "particularly in the presently existing context."
Mr. Kerry's aides at first said the "carpet-bombing" term had been published in several places but could not come up with a citation when pressed. David Wade, a Kerry spokesman, later said unnamed Democrats "and even Republican friends" had used the phrase to describe a coming advertising blitz.
As the Kerry campaign moves from the Democratic Underground into the full light of day, they need to take care that the candidate does not personally recycle Michael Moore-style fantasies. To clarify the importance of being within low earth orbit, perhaps they should re-name themselves the Fast Accurate Response Team. Just thinking out loud here.
Anyway, maybe Kerry meant to say that the the Evil Reps are planning "Operation Carpet-cleaning". Sort of an upscale version of mopping the floor with Kerry.
MORE: The WaPo notices that Mr. Kerry has not been a steady beacon on defense. And they dredge up our fave Kerry quote, where he (correctly) characterizes his own 1984 positions as "stupid".
Brilliant! Is Kerry’s FART stifling debate, clearing the room of serious issues and answers?
And how does the mainstream media react to the FART’s noxious emissions? Do they get a whiff of the contradictions, flip-flops, and outright falsehoods emanating from the campaign?
Will they shine a light on its operations? Will they use a flashlight to avoid any damage that might result from open flames near the FART’s origin?
And if the FART radiates from the center of the campaign, what, pray tell, does that tell us about its source?
Posted by: The Kid | February 25, 2004 at 08:15 AM
John Kerry, January 19, 2004:
" Now George Bush and Karl Rove say that in 2004, they want to run on national security. I can see why. They certainly can’t run on jobs or health care or the environment. Well, as I have said, I know something about aircraft carriers for real.
" And if George W. Bush wants to make national security the central issue in this campaign, I have three words for him I know he understands: Bring it on. "
John Kerry February 21, 2004:
" I'd like to know what it is Republicans who didn't serve in Vietnam have against those of us who did. I'm tired of Republicans trying to divert attention from the real issues...."
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | February 25, 2004 at 10:54 AM
Yeah, I guess he didn't mean "Bring it on" to mean "bring it on".
Posted by: TM | February 25, 2004 at 03:17 PM