Monday, October 25

As badly as I want to, I just don't see what the big deal is.

Like a host of other bloggers, I kept skipping around yesterday afternoon to RedState, Powerline, FreeRepublic, Drudge and other websites hoping to get some inkling of the "surprise" story from the WashTimes. Turns out it's just another confirmation of what most of us already knew about John Kerry.

In essence, the story reports that, contrary to Kerry's oft-repeated claim that he met with "all" the members of the UN Security Council prior to the Senate's 2002 authorization of the use of force in Iraq, he only met with representatives of a few of the countries on the UNSC.

I wanted it to be a bombshell- to be some damning but fair indictment that would snap to attention those voters who aren't yet serious about this election and cause them to realize what a bad choice a vote for Kerry would be.

But I don't think the story has legs. Though you can find a mention of it on nearly every center-right blog, I don't think the general public will care that much. Lying about meeting a bunch of foreign leaders at the UN when, in fact, you apparently only met a few is indeed pathetic and strange, but will it repulse voters? Not if the use of Mary Cheney, the denigration of stay-at-home moms and spreading baseless rumors about a draft didn't already do the trick.

Yet the truth is still on our side. The story isn't by itself the best argument for the President, but it is a nice, fresh piece of supporting evidence to challenge Senator Kerry's false claims of superiority in matters of foreign policy.

I find it interesting that the NYTimes is fronting the explosives story today, given that there was buzz about the WashTimes article since Saturday (at the latest). Did the Gray Lady have this one in the hopper, ready to negate anything the other Times might be publishing?

It's mere speculation, but Hugh's breathless assessment aside, I think the two stories will effectively cancel each other out. Of course, Hugh's points are right, but most voters probably won't examine the facts that closely.

It would be nice to have a big story surface that would reaffirm all we already know about the man who makes Ted Kennedy look like William F. Buckley, but we oughtn't to rely on that to win this election. October Surprises have to be megastories to move the needle (even DWIgate didn't win it for Gore), and even more so coming from our side because they need enough momentum to clear the media sound barrier. We saw this with the painfully slow development (in the MSM) of Rathergate, which should have been a stop-the-presses moment.

By the way, I hope I'm wrong about all this. I hope the sheer will and reach of the blogosphere causes voters all over to take notice of this story. Maybe this will crystallize Kerry for them in a way they hadn't seen him before. I'll remain optimistic on that front.

But for now, as one "who spent the weekend dreaming up world-shattering scenarios" and is now nursing a consequent anticlimax, I'll just wait and see.


Post a Comment

<< Home