It must be seen to be believed.

One thing that warmed the cockles of my heart was a group of three boys that set up shop along one of the main thoroughfares to the Kerry event, just behind my house. They were all showing support for the President by displaying Bush-Cheney ‘04 signs. I wish I’d had a camera with me at that moment; I’m gratified that these kids, no more than 10 or 11 years old, had the bravery to stand up for what they believe in. Heaven knows that’s risky business with the climate of fear that’s been created by the liberals.

Hark, is that the sound of fireworks? How utterly freakin’ patriotic! I wish I could vote for John F. Kerry for President right now!!

My only (non-unique) observation is that Cheney appeared to be the calm, collected, adult. An adult that was mildly annoyed with Edwards’ over-the-top rhetoric and, at times, deliberately misleading statements. My personal favorite Edwards quote was that “in fact, Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction.” In contrast, my favorite Cheney comment was the one about meeting Edwards for the first time on that stage. Ouch.

Lorie Byrd is a bit more extreme than me over at PoliPundit.com… but really, we only differ in degree.

I don’t know about you, but I want to know more. It seems like the big losers are the accountants and the rich, to be honest. Wait, this just in… John Kerry is rich? (Sorry, we thought you knew.?ed)

UPDATE: Well, I obviously didn’t get a degree in journalism. Mr. Boortz didn’t show us why Kerry hasn’t done his homework, but rather simply that he hasn’t. Consequently, I’ve fixed that first paragraph to match reality.

MORE: Wacky. The day after I post this, Instapundit notes the other side of this story. If nothing else, it raises a concern as to how the Fair Tax affects (currently taxed) savings accounts. I’m not convinced at the magnitude of the loss, but it’s worth exploring further.

The Kerry campaign has made his Viet Nam service its front in order to disguise the fact that Kerry has been a complete non-entity for the past twenty years in the Senate, voting over and over again for tax hikes and defense and intelligence cuts. Kerry campaigned for nuclear freezes and against the death penalty while introducing almost no legislation, despite his tenure in the Senate. And now that people have decided to look into the only qualification Kerry himself has offered for his candidacy, his campaign squeals about McCarthyism.

I’m not going to spoil the punch line. Be sure to read the whole thing.

John Kerry is running on his Vietnam record.

George W. Bush is not running on his police record.

Got it?

Had I been a war hero like John Kerry, had I served my country in Vietnam when my opponent decided to stay at home, I would have been offended a month ago. This guy has been given 1,000 reasons to be offended, 1,000 reasons to go out and strike back, 1,000 reasons to be aggressive and put his finger out and say, how dare you.

He hasn’t done it. If he is not going to do it when they attack his war record…

Maybe, just maybe, Sen. Kerry knows that even more would come out than he’d like. More about medals he was awarded, and particularly Purple Hearts; more about medals that were thrown away – but weren’t; more about his anti-war activities following his return from Vietnam… and who knows what else. I rather suspect that the story goes a lot deeper than we’ve discovered so far.

MORE: Here’s the original quote by Hardball host Chris Matthews:

That attack about Ted Kennedy and John Kerry was personal. Nobody is going to step back and say it wasn’t. The idea that this guy is going to shoot spitballs in defense of country that he risked his life to defend some years ago is a personal attack on the guy. This is serious business.

Uh, Chris, dude… there’s a lot of folks saying that this wasn’t personal.

Or maybe she was just exhausted. After all, it’s 11:00 p.m. there.

UPDATE: Beldar has related thoughts. In particular, he’s more optimistic than I am.

Of particular note is an interview of FEC Chairman Bradley Smith. This is one bureaucrat that knows that his agency was set up to enforce laws, not create them.There’s more background in an earlier interview, too. As a pair, these interviews are an excellent introduction on CFR and how it is failing to live up to the intentions of its sponsors… assuming, of course, that said intentions are noble and worthy of aspiration in the first place. A key quote:

[... If] we limited contributions to these 527 groups as they’re called-for the section of the tax code under which they’re organized-I think the money would just swing over to groups that are organized under section 501(c) of the tax code, and those groups are even less regulated than 527s, if you like the regulations. So we’re not really accomplishing anything here, we’re just kind of chasing a tail at this point.

This is an important issue. If you read nothing else, read the first interview I linked to above and skip the rest.

First, as suggested elsewhere, I don’t believe that President Bush (or the Kerry campaign, for that matter) can coordinate with the groups that are putting out these ads – even by working with them to stand down on their attacks. The candidates and their campaigns must necessarily rely on the courts to sort this out.

Second, I’ve concluded that this is not just a bold move, but a brilliant strategic move. At this point, as not a single shred of evidence has been produced, I don’t believe that the Swift Boat vets’ ads are the result of any illegal activities by the Bush campaign. I am absolutely convinced, however, that they realized that this was a golden opportunity for them to press their case against organizations like MoveOn.org and America Coming Together and at the same time appear to be taking the moral high ground over the Kerry campaign, which steadfastly maintains that they “haven’t spent one dime” on the anti-Bush ads.

With estimates of anywhere from $145 to $200 million spent on anti-Bush ads so far this year, the Bush campaign has virtually nothing to lose by speaking out against all ads funded by 527 groups. The money spent by the Swifties is on the order of two magnitudes less, and Bush has been careful to criticize the ads, not the veterans behind them.

Now, the lawsuit Bush filed on Thursday turns up the heat on this issue. And why not? This situation can be spun as a win, either way:

If the case languishes, or if the courts rule that the 2002 campaign finance reform rules do not and/or cannot apply to the 527 groups, the ads continue. The Bush campaign can rightly claim that it did everything it could do, legally, to stop the SBVT ads.

If the case is expedited and the FEC is somehow forced to apply campaign finance reform rules on the 527 groups, the attack ads cease. This would be devastating to the “anybody but Bush” movement.

Further, in any event, Bush has effectively countered Kerry’s use of Sen. John McCain in a recent ad tying Bush to the Swifties.

"Sen. McCain enthusiastically applauds President Bush?s commitment to ensuring that 527s operate under the same funding rules that apply to federal political candidates," McCain spokesman Marshall Whitman said in a statement Thursday.

I don’t expect the FEC to do anything about this, even when they finally rule on the matter. Complaints to the FEC were registered some time ago and haven’t been acted on. This suggests that the FEC simply can’t do anything about these ads. The Bush campaign has undoubtedly come to the same conclusion, and has decided that since they can’t win, any risk of looking like an enemy of free speech is mitigated. This lawsuit is nothing more than a calculated risk.

And that’s the way I see it.

UPDATE: Bush further solidifies his hold on the high ground, according to the BBC.

MORE: Here’s why I think that Bush won’t be able to convince a court to push the FEC to restrict the 527s in any meaningful way. Ironically, a conservative court will dismiss the lawsuit because individual speech is clearly protected. No, Bush’s only real hope is a progressive court, one that is wont to reinterpret the law according to its intent; however, this would draw the attention of the likes of Joe Sandler and Harold Ickes. As the Democrats stand to lose most heavily, they enter this as the (unlikely) white knight for the FEC.

FINALLY: It’s worth noting that getting Sen. McCain on board during this critical phase of the campaign is likely to give the President a lift. McCain’s (dare I say) occasionally leftist tendencies will bring some part of the moderate vote that the President wouldn’t otherwise see. How better to attract McCain than to support a piece of legislation with his name on it?