Kerry strategy question

[dennis4868]

why has Kerry and his team decided not to hold Bush accountable for 911...you know that simply little PDB that said BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO ATTACK IN THE UNITED STATES. Plus, there were 30 other PDBs on this topic that tried to get Bush's attention on this matter. The only criticism that Kerry has laid out against Bush re:911 was the fact that Bush sat in that classroom for 7 minutes after being told we were under attack.

But it seems to me that Kerry has a clear opening on this matter. I mean why do you think Bush and his criminal thugs resisted having a 911 commission in the first place? Or better, if a Dem was prexz on 911 does anyone think that the repub nominee would not hold that against the dem nominee?

So why is Kerry and the dems in general not holding Bush accountable for his screw ups in the lead up to 911? I am not saying Bush should take all the blame for 911, but there is NO DOUBT BUSH DID NOT TAKE TERRORISM SERIOUSLY before 911 and would not listen to Richard Clarke, the CIA and the Clinton Administrations' warnings. This is what is considered presidential malpractice!

[Carla in Ca]

1. I have argued this point many times

The argument 'we haven't had another attack' just boils my blood! 9/11 was on his watch, and with warnings!
The 'bush knew' spin is not being used to our advantage.

[tritsofme]

2. This would look like a desperate move.

However right it may be, it wouldn't fly well with voters.

If I see Kerry using this rhetoric, then I'm going to think its panic time.