Having watched Thursday night's debate, I am amazed that anyone can say that Kerry didn't walk away with it. The gulf between thoughtful and articulate speech and the clamorings and yammering of memorized catch phrases has never seemed so wide.

Tell, if one is consistantly wrong, is consistency still a good thing? " A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines," wrote Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Inaddition, while I have never been a big Kerry fn (having voted for Dean) and was never in favor of the war, I have to say that there is a difference between voting for the war outright and voting to give the president authority to use force should it become necessary and all other options fail. Of course, it was not necessary, and other options were still available.

Just watch the Republican spin, spin, spin. Karl Rove is like a little Rumplestiltskin, spinning the straw of unntruth into fool's gold.