BUSH'S POST-DEBATE AGENDA: ATTACK KERRY ON ALL FRONTS

I think Eleanor Clift gets it just about right in this Newsweekarticle about Furious George's "scorched-earth strategy" for the remainder of the campaign:

The Duelfer report, Bremer’s words and Rumsfeld’s confession may take some time to sink in with voters. It’s like a bad marriage, says Wilson. You have to first come to grips with the fact that you’re in a bad relationship. Then you have to decide to do something about it—and finally you have to muster the courage to go out with somebody new. The country has a lot invested in Bush as protector in chief. Admitting that confidence was misplaced is hard, and that’s what makes this such a close race. 

I've said it before, and I've said it often. Personal attacks upon Furious George infuriate soft supporters; they have been so emotionally invested in Bush these past three years that even as they consider a change, they resent hearing him called "dumb" and "lazy" -- I heard a caller just this morning on talk radio saying, "When they say that, it's like they're calling ME dumb because I supported him in 2000." Kerry's been playing it just right when he criticizes the little dog: he says it "pains him to say," "I regret to say," just as a statesman should. He rarely displays pleasure at Bush's mistakes -- after all, they have a negative impact upon us citizens, and a politician should never be glad about that. Bush is making a big mistake in continuing to mock Kerry gleefully even as Kerry is proving himself to be tough, resolute and PRESIDENTIAL. FuGee (yes! Skippy! I have just invented that shorthand for Furious George) looks like a playground bully as he taunts Kerry mercilessly. It's not a pretty sight. I just hope he continues to do so in the debate tonight. Let America see just once more the difference between a sober, deliberate, caring man who is, like so many of us, conflicted on some issues but has stood by his positions once taken; and a spoiled frat boy who needs someone else to feed him his answers.