If they are trying to get the undecided vote by copying the president regarding Al Qaeda, what does that tell you?
It tells me that all of the phony window-dressing and supposedly trying to not make this convention a Bush-Bash fest has come unraveled, and they want to sound tough and really hard a@@ instead of wimpy.
There was a time in politics, pre-Bill Clinton, where each candidate would adopt his positions on the issues of the day, and voters would choose the candidate whose positions most closely matched his own. On a major issue such as going to war, there were clearly identified hawks and doves.
Clinton changed all of that. He was a slave to the polls. He would adopt any policy or position that would gain for him the majority of electoral votes. This is why, for example, he went along with (and later took full credit for) welfare reform, a decidedly conservative idea. A true idealogue of the left (think Adlai Stevenson) would never change a core position for political expediency. Fortunately for Clinton, he has no core beliefs, beyond furthering his own power.
Now, with Kerry/Edwards, the dems have gone a step further. Like Clinton, they make extensive use of polling data, but there is now an attempt to be all things to all people. It's not enough for them to adopt the policy that the majority of the voters favor. They refuse to concede the remaining votes. So, Kerry/Edwards espouses a pro-war, anti-funding, anti-war, pro-funding, "we can negotiate," "we can fight," and scores of other contradictory positions. Kerry has been described as a flip/flopper, but it really goes beyond that. A candidate who repeatedly changes his mind is bad enough. One who refuses to make up his mind, and attempts to convince each voter that his policies are in synch with the voters is far worse.
Hopefully, the American voter will tire of the charade. With George W. Bush, you know what you are getting. Voters are, at a very minimum, entitled to that.