Remember that World War II movie "A Bridge Too Far?"
John Kerry (search) may have given us the Iraq war movie "A Nuance Too Far."
Kerry says he would still vote to authorize the war in Iraq even if he had known then what he knows now — namely that weapons of mass destruction would not be found and that the Al Qaeda-Iraq connections wouldn't be as strong as he would have liked.
He still would have voted to authorize the war because a president needs that authority, but he wouldn't have carried the war out as Bush did.
He kind of left unanswered if he would have invaded Iraq, but he forcefully condemned what he thinks was a clear lack of a plan to win the peace, and the fact that American troops didn't have sufficient armored Humvees early in the post-war.
But the overall picture is a guy who would have done the same as Bush, except in the details.
Does this mean the Howard Dean (search) end of the Democratic Party — the anti-war crowd — does this mean they now do not have a major candidate? Does it mean they have to vote for Ralph Nader (search) and in the process help Bush?
I thought this was supposed to be an election about Bush and his decisions and his judgment.
So what's it about now? Vote for the guy who did the war the way he did it, or vote for the guy who would have done the war differently?
This, my friends, is what they put in the dictionary when they define nuance.
That's My Word.
What do you think? We'd like to hear from you, so send us your comments at firstname.lastname@example.org. Some of your e-mails will be featured on the air or on our site.