6:27 pm | New York City

The BWA Campaign Blog National Affairs staff will be traveling tomorrow, so you will have to come up with your own fear-maddened gibberish to dwell on, alert readers. We have faith in you. We will return on Friday, broadcasting from Washington, a town with a decent daily newspaper. Ahem.

While you wait, please enjoy our snazzy new masthead.

1:46 pm | New York City

In addition to the usual assortment of poorly-spelled hate mail, fan letters, badly-constructed explosives disguised as Amazon.com packages and flowers, this morning's mail brought the following questions from our secretive rightwardly-leaning friend 'Deep Pockets':

I am curious how the BWAPB2004NWTPAP New York Bureau Chief feels about the Kerry "I am going to delay the nomination" trial balloon. At dinner last night I had a conversation with a Californian GOP supporter (yes, there are a few) who thinks it is backhanded, selfish and perhaps illegal. I for one don't share his assessment. I find the idea tactically sound as long as the only voters upset are those voting for Bush anyway.

Question 1: How are those on the left discussing Kerry's idea? Do they denounce it as a hypocritical flouting of the same campaign finance laws Kerry supposedly supports now that they have become inconvenient? Do they see it as a cunning move to level the playing field? Is it a bit of both -- a "desperate times call for desperate measures" rational?

Question 2: How should the media cover the Democratic "convention" if there is no nomination? Are conventions as a forum for Party nominations still valid in this day and age if the candidate won't even accept it until it is convenient? Should we do away with this relic?

Well, first of all, the left won't talk to us since we called Nader a drunkard and a "blood-goblin" at last year's Jefferson-Jackson dinner. We were a bit in our cups, as the British say.

More to the point, as we addressed earlier this week, it is our opinion that Kerry should reach down and find a pair. The man killed guerilla soldiers with his bare hands waist deep on swamp-water and now he's afraid to get in there and mix it up with a bunch of blowhards and too-rich-to-know-how-anything-works Texans? It's ridiculous.

As for the general public sentiment on this issue, we suspect there is none, as the idea is somewhat arcane and procedural, like delegate-recognition rules, or what the Vice-President's job is. And as far as the media is concerned, if the Democrats put on an entire convention and then walked out of Boston with no nominee, we wouldn't give them so much as a bottom-of-the-screen-crawler's worth of coverage, but we suspect Les Moonves and his colleagues are a more craven sort than that.

(The AP quoted our favorite old liberal war-horse, George McGovern, sharing his thoughts on this plan. "It's the worst idea I've heard on timing since I gave my (acceptance) address at 2 a.m. in the morning," said McGovern)

Speaking of the electorate, that vast, lovable, mule-headed body, today's Washington Post Campaign Report remarks thusly:

It's also interesting to find that Americans say they are dialed in to the campaign: 33 percent say they are following the election "very closely," and 41 percent say they're watching "somewhat closely." That's a close match with how registered voters polled in mid-October of 2000.

We remember that election. Whatever happened to that other guy? You know, the tall man with the pedantic manner and the power ties?

And firmly clinching the title of "The Story That Would Not Die, Despite Being Almost Entirely Fictional", the ever-returning boomerang-style speculation of a McCain VP candidacy is back in the news today, with weary, beaten Democratic first-stringer Dick Gephardt now pushing McCain himself:

Asked after a speech in California on Monday what he thought of Mr. McCain's potential for the Democratic presidential ticket, Mr. Gephardt described him as a "very attractive figure in American politics" who "would be accepted by the Democratic Party," according to CNN.

That does it. We give up. We don't have the strength to fight it anymore. Do what you like. Let's just nominate him and see if he shows up to the rallies.

1:10 pm | New York City

The president addressed the nation last night, settling once and for all any fears that we are mired in a senseless and brutal war that will leave the moral legacy of the United States in catastrophic ruins and our once-worthy Armed Forces red to the forearms with the blood of the helpless and the overwhelmed.

Despite this, sort-of-candidate Ralph Nader called for Bush's impeachment yesterday here in Manhattan, calling the president a criminal and a "messianic militarist". We suspect Kerry will not echo these sentiments in any sort of public forum.

The Wall Street Journal has poll results from the "battleground states" showing Kerry ahead in a number of places Gore failed in 2000, leading Bush in 12 of the 16 states listed. We recommend the map and chart online. They are tops.

No brimstone today, here at the BWA Campaign Blog. We are hungover.

4:08 pm | New York City

With his job-approval ratings at an all-time low (a new CBS poll puts his disapproval number at 52), the President will take to the airwaves tonight to defend his increasingly horrible, senseless war. Bob Herbert piled on in today's New York Times:

The president is scheduled to give a speech tonight to lay out his "clear strategy" for the future of Iraq. Don't hold your breath. This is the same president who deliberately exploited his nation's fear of terrorism in the aftermath of Sept. 11 to lead it into the long dark starless night of Iraq.

There's a terrible sense of dread filtering across America at the moment and it's not simply because of the continuing fear of terrorism and the fact that the nation is at war. It's more frightening than that. It grows out of the suspicion that we all may be passengers in a vehicle that has made a radically wrong turn and is barreling along a dark road, with its headlights off and with someone behind the wheel who may not know how to drive.

Whether these sorts of brutal sentiments will translate into any meaningful support for Kerry is still vague and murky to the pontificating class. Current conventional wisdom, which, like marmalade, congeals to fit neatly around the prevailing shape of things, holds that the election is currently a referendum on Bush, and Kerry is serving simply to hold the place marked "Other." It is both our educated opinion and personal experience that is is the case, although we could certainly wish for something more inspiring out of our leaders.

Speaking of the gloomy-jawed candidate-in-opposition, Kerry's people spent the weekend floating a bizarre and elaborate plan wherein he will NOT accept the nomination at the Democratic convention, but simply give speeches and stand at a brightly-polished lectern on national television, grinning woodenly as patriotically-colored balloons rain down. The idea behind this weirdness is that it will give Kerry additional time to raise money before officially becoming the candidate, and hold onto his $75 million in general-election loot for a while longer.

While it's true that Bush has vastly more money than Kerry, we are irritated by this idea. The problem is that we don't have any candidates who realize that there are more important things than money, because the secretive operatives they've been hiring for three generations keep repeating that endlessly, squirreled down in their trenchcoats and hatefully-opulent offices on K Street, counting piles of $100 bills and muttering.

As, regretfully, an increasingly-partisan force in American electoral politics, the BWA Campaign Blog urges the Senator and his coterie of travelling monkeys to quit being such cowards. Screw your courage to the sticking-place, Mr. Kerry. We have lost Howard Dean, John McCain shows no sign of defecting, and the president and his delusional warband seem incapable of reversing course or admitting even the slightest error, driving the vast ship of state further into the vile, sucking mud of despair and bloodshed with each passsing day.

This is not a drill, gentlemen. A spirited defense of the American way of life is required, and you are the ones holding the bayonets.

1:04 pm | Washington DC

"Follow the Money" Edition

There aren't TOO many reports of U.S. troops beating, torturing and humiliating helpless prisoners-of-war in the name of national security, patriotism and universal liberation of the downtrodden from tyranny to anger up the blood this morning, so we will take a pass on ranting for today. Don't worry, though. We are still mightily riled up.

Alert reader James Johnson, intent, like many of our fine readers, on the downfall of the president, shared his canny observations on politics and boxing:

In the historic "Rumble In The Jungle" boxing match Muhammad Ali faced George Foreman, who was bigger, stronger, and meaner (despite his current jolly hamburger-man persona). Ali knew he couldn't beat Foreman in a conventional fight so he covered his face, ribs, and stomach, leaned on the ropes, and "played dead" for the first 8 rounds or so. Then, when Foreman was all worn out, Ali suddenly sprung to life and knocked the fool out of him. Boxing historians dubbed this brilliant strategy the "rope-a-dope".

Now, George Bush isn't bigger or stronger than John Kerry, but he does have more than twice as much money to spend on this campaign. When you also factor in his incumbent status and Ralph Nader it looks like Kerry has little hope for winning this race using a conventional campaign strategy. Do you think there is a chance that Kerry might be planning his own "rope-a-dope"? He could hang back, play dead, and suddenly attack with both barrels later in the game when George can't possibly spend all of his money.

This would certainly explain Kerry's lack-luster campaigning so far. Plus George Bush is a dope.

Mr. Johnson is correct in his assessment of the campaigns' respective financial strengths. The Washington Post reports that the Bush campaign is currently sitting on a pile of $71.6 million, to Kerry's relatively paltry $28 million. In better news for the weak and ineffectual left, the Post also reports that Kerry has ramped up his money-grubbing lately:

Kerry's fundraising haul of $30 million in April -- compared with the Bush campaign's $15.6 million -- marked the second consecutive month in which the Massachusetts senator's receipts have exceeded the president's, according to the two campaigns. Over the past two months, Kerry has attracted about $30 million more than Bush. The president did much of his fundraising last year and has stopped attending events to raise more for his campaign.

We would like to note that the BWA Campaign Blog, which is arguably just as significant a force for political change, gets by with annual expenditures not exceeding $180. To remedy this, please check the box marked "Donations to Political Blogs" on your 1040EZ tax form.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Due to some sort of inexplicable technical problem, we have misplaced most of our posts from May. This is a grievous loss, both for the integrity of the BWA Campaign Blog's archives, and for American letters in general. Possibly they are around here somewhere.