I agree, and that's one of the big problems with Kerry: he can't stay on the same message for longer than one daily news cycle. No wonder people think that he's not steady enough in a crisis. How he reacts to this may be the final determinant in peoples' minds about his performance under pressure.
And the advent of the blogoshpere hasn't helped him, as every syllable that he utters is immediately propagated and pored over for the latest flip-flop. So, good luck, 'cause I don't think he's going to pull through this one.
The problem for kerry is that the modern news cycle is hourly not daily.
His four points for a plan in iraq was discted before the spin doctors had a chance to say boo.
By the time albright appears on the talk shows, she is already citing out dated talking points.
"In an age of terrorism, [voters] are not going to leave the president that is in office and go to someone who they doubt has the steady hand of experience," said Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, Missouri Democrat, in a conference call with reporters yesterday.
Mr. Kerry accused Mr. Dean of being "all over the lot" on the Iraq war, saying he himself has been in favor of toppling Saddam "all along." But as recently as Dec. 11, Mr. Kerry was touting his own antiwar credentials.
"For months, Howard Dean has been going around the country saying, 'What are all these other people doing who voted for the president's war? I'm the only guy who was against it,' " Mr. Kerry said on CNBC's "Capital Report."
Mr. Kerry voted for the resolution that authorized Mr. Bush to use force to oust Saddam, but he voted against spending $87 billion on troop support and the reconstruction of Iraq, a contradiction that he has spent weeks explaining to Democratic voters.
Mr. Kerry told an audience in Florida last month that he voted against the troop funding to "send a message" urging Mr. Bush to build a broader coalition — essentially securing the approval of France and Germany — and work more closely with the United Nations.
"But oh, no, this president rushed to war," Mr. Kerry told Florida Democrats on Nov. 20.
Yet yesterday, Mr. Kerry assailed Mr. Dean for his statement that the United States needed U.N. permission before taking action in Iraq.
"Perhaps it reflects inexperience, but for Howard Dean to permit a veto over when America can or cannot act not only becomes little more than a pretext for doing nothing, it cedes our security and presidential responsibility to defend America to someone else — a danger for both our national security and global stability," Mr. Kerry said.
On the morning Saddam's capture was announced, however, Mr. Kerry suggested on "Fox News Sunday" that a broader U.N. coalition could have located Saddam faster than the Army's 4th Infantry Division did.