JFK IN THE NYT

I've seen various responses to the Bai article on Kerry in the New York Times (requires registration, but go to www.bugmenot.com for help in avoiding spam). I like Lileks best:

Mosquito bites are a nuisance. Cable outages are a nuisance. Someone shooting up a school in Montana or California or Maine on behalf of the brave martyrs of Fallujah isn't a nuisance. It's war.

and

I don’t want to go back there. Planes into towers. That changed the terms. I am remarkably disinterested in returning to a place where such things are unimaginable. Where our nighmares are their dreams. ...No. We have to go the place where they are.

Volokh is not kind. Powerline is somewhat nicer. Rudy Giuliani is cutting, to say the least.

But I think the most perceptive comment comes from Citizen Smash:

Essentially, Kerry’s goal in the War on Terror appears to be to reduce the terrorists’ effectiveness to a level where he can “safely” focus his attention on other priorities. I’m sorry, but that’s just not good enough for me. My problem with Kerry isn’t that he sees Iraq as a diversion from the War on Terror, but rather that he sees the War on Terror as a diversion from his domestic agenda. (Emphasis in original)

Just so.