[Spok]

This Reuters article is very interesting. It mentions two facts that one would not ordinarily expect to see:
1. It mentions that Kerry voted for the war, and
2. It mentions that Kerry has no plan for Iraq.

Is this just token objectivity? Or has there been a change in policy?

[TomGuy]

2. It mentions that Kerry has no plan for Iraq.

Kerry doesn't have much of a plan for anything. Whenever an interviewer asks, the response, whether direct for Kerry or through his surrogates, never gives any specific details. All they have is "well, George Bush is bad..."

The interviewers let it go. They don't call Kerry or the surrogates on sidestepping.

Kerry and surrogates patterned response [almost a direct quote, if you listen closely]: Kerry has a plan, but George Bush is bad...blah blah blah.