Whether he intended it or not, John Kerry's much commented upon statement - that terrorism should be reduced to a nuisance like prostitution or gambling -- has engaged the central issue of this presidential campaign. His statement was neither an accident nor as easily dismissed as many people have asserted. Rather, it reflects the institutional policy of the CIA, and is at the heart of the almost open warfare between the Bush White House and the CIA.

The political class's Edwards-huffing is like a summer heat rash -- it is mildly irritating but should subside in about a week: Wear loosely fitted clothes, keep out of the heat and ease your way through an adequate provision of gin, tonic, limes and bitters. Tropical drinks served with little umbrellas are acceptable substitutes. Now would be an excellent time to catch up on your genuine summer fiction reading (in other words, avoid Edwards media commentary for a week, which is not quite fiction, nor quite non-fiction. It is not so much fiction as it is faction.)

Jack Kennedy would "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe." For Kennedy: "Only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it."

It is ironic that in this time and in this place, the direct descendent of those words, and the virile passions they convey, can be found coming from the mouth and heart not of the Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, but of his opponent, the Texas Republican George W. Bush.

Yesterday, addressing the den of jackals, thieves, petty dictators and other international flotsam -- which goes by the name of the United Nations General Assembly -- President Bush echoed the brave, necessary words of the once Prince of Camelot:

The latest proposed victim in our struggle against terrorism is Army Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, recently named Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence. His mission is to reinvigorate the search for Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar and other leaders of global terrorism. By training and experience, he is marvelously prepared for his new duties - having risen from a Delta Force commando to top-secret Joint Special Operations Command, through the CIA, to command of the Army's Special Forces. For a quarter century, he has been fighting terror with his bare hands, his fine mind and his faith-shaped soul.

You’ve heard, I’m sure, of the righteous outcry over Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis's comment that "It's fun to shoot some people," made about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the loud complaints from various leaders of special ethnic interest groups belly-aching about it.

Well, actually, it is "fun" to shoot some people - and all of us who have ever waited through an hour and a half movie, or read some 300 pages of a thriller, to the point when the bad guys finally get their comeuppance know this perfectly well.

In the American South, William Faulkner once wrote, the past isn't dead. It isn't even past. This may become truer the farther south one goes.

Witnessing the scramble among Democratic presidential hopefuls to appeal to voters in the various states about to have primaries is not a pleasant experience. What has come to be the main theme of these candidates is the refrain that whoever isn’t rich, whoever has had a brush with poverty at anytime in his or her life, must want and is fully entitled to have governments engage in massive, relentless wealth redistribution. This is a pitiful and quite disgusting message to put out in America, the country to which the poor of the world used to — and often still — flock precisely to escape their poverty through hard work, entrepreneurship, and ingenuity.

In mainstream discussions taxation amounts to little more than the unpleasant burden that comes from government spending, no different from having to earn money so as to buy stuff in any normal household. Politicians make spending decisions, which become public policy and commit government to fund what was promised and the funding comes from taxes. No other source of revenue is even considered.

A recent meeting of top government economists and policy makers at the Washington-based Brookings Institute was addressed by several mainstream thinkers and their message was that unless taxes are increased, or at least the Bush tax cuts