But Kerry is just can not very quick thinking like Sen Clinton.  

THAT is the winning issue right now.

A year ago, he might have won on the war.  But the problems in Iraq have been superseded by the ones at home.

And they have to avoid a mere recitation of the problem.  People know the problem.  Instead they must focus on his plan to fix it.

I know some in the Obama camp don't wanna put this front and center. Because it's how Clinton won in '92.

I remember what Gov. Richards said of Daddy Bush (who also had the Kerry habit of speaking jerkishly on occasion) during the 88 Dem convention.  

"Poor George, he can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."

Of course, Governor Richards, could make light of his foot in mouth disease because it was meant to make him look the Republican fool.

I don't think she would have used those exact words in public to shut up Kerry's big, honking, jerkish mouth.  But, being the elder wise Stateswoman she was, I am sure she would have had something to say to other Dems if not to Kerry himself about his own big honking planinum foot in mouth disease.  And, that he should ST*U.

I barely voted for Kerry/Edwards in 2004 but my disdain and disgust for the Bushies was too deep not to cast that vote.

I cringe whenever I see Kerry on my TV and it's times like that when my remote is my best friend.

Why do Dems let this man speak at all any more?  Stoopid.  When will we learn?  After the reaction of many left blogs, newspapers, TV commentators and Dems like Kerry, never it seems.

KERRY: I will tell you -- absolutely, because what has happened is John McCain -- you know, we've been warning against the third term of George Bush. With the choice of Governor Palin, it's now the third term of Bush-Cheney, because what he's done is he's chosen somebody who actually doesn't believe that climate change is manmade. He's chosen somebody who has zero -- zero -- experience in foreign policy.

The first threshold test of a president of a nominee in choosing a vice president is to prove to the American people that the person that you've chosen can fill in tomorrow, that they come with the requisite experience to lead the nation in foreign policy and in national security.

You know, she may be -- I mean, I'm sure she's a terrific person. I'm not attacking her. I think John McCain 's judgment is once again put at issue, because he's chosen somebody who clearly does not meet the national security threshold, who is not ready to be president tomorrow.

However, word is that the Republican surrogates have been making the rounds asserting that Palin has foreign policy experience because of Alaska's close proximity to Russia.

So I ask you this BTD - what do we do about their fabulist fabrications on this front?  

How do we respond to those kinds of assertions?

Do we ignore them?

I tend to agree that attacking her on the experience front is not productive, but they are going to tell tales and shape an image for her that will be built on lies - as they do - and it seems perilous to me to allow them to get away with that - on the other hand - it could be seen as a strategy to bait us into this discussion - but if we don't respond - Americans will come away thinking that Alaska is managing US-Russia relations or some such silliness...

So what do we do?

I'll have to give Kerry props on one point though. He at least wasn't dumb enough to mention Obama's time in the Il legislature. I'm sorry but I always found that argument laughable.

Palin has traveled abroad too to see troops. Now, that may not be equal to all the rallies Obama had but it's simply not true what Kerry said.

So has this become Palin vs. Obama or what? The experience argument is so silly since Palin is VP and talking about McCain dying in office is does nothing short of making the Obama campaign sound morbid and depressing.

Shake, shiver, shudder, pee your pants, I guess we just can't solve this one.  Boo Hoo.