Here’s one of the lines Bush keeps repeating on the campaign trail in arguing there should be caps on malpractice awards:

Too many people are driving too far to get good health care because these lawsuits are ruining medicine, as far as I’m concerned. You can’t be pro-doctor and pro-patient and pro-personal injury trial lawyer at the same time. (Applause.) You have to make a choice. My opponent made his choice and he put a personal injury trial lawyer on the ticket.
AUDIENCE: Booo!

Okay, Bush frames the issue to get a gratuitous shot it. Boo those bad trial lawyers. But then Bush adds this:

I have made my choice. I’m standing with the doctors of Ohio, I’m standing with the patients of Ohio. We are for medical liability reform.

That’s a pretty picture, isn’t it? On one side you have Kerry/Edwards and the bad trial lawyers, and on the other you have the doctors, patients, and Bush all working for better health care.
But what if the doctors mess up in treating the patients? Do the two still share the same interests? In the real world (as opposed to Bush world) they don’t; that’s why the trial lawyers enter the picture–to represent the patient’s interests in the dispute with the doctor/insurance company’s interests.
But somehow Bush stands with both sides at the same time.

Some things haven’t changed much over the past 50 years.

Nope. No explosives here. Saddam cleared them out.
UPDATE: Besides, in the fog of war there’s no way we could have monitored one of the largest munitions dumps in Iraq.

According to a recent national survey by Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates, Bush has a slight lead over Kerry in an unweighted poll. But if you weigh the minority vote to the turnout shown in the 2000 exit polls, Kerry has over a 3% lead. This, among other factors, has lead a number of people in the left blogoshere to level charges that the Republicans are engaged in a campaign to suppress minority voting.
“Come on,” you may be thinking. “This is 2004. America abandoned those kind of practices decades ago.”
Have we?

A secret document obtained from inside Bush campaign headquarters in Florida suggests a plan – possibly in violation of US law – to disrupt voting in the state’s African-American voting districts, a BBC Newsnight investigation reveals.
Two e-mails, prepared for the executive director of the Bush campaign in Florida and the campaign’s national research director in Washington DC, contain a 15-page so-called “caging list”.
It lists 1,886 names and addresses of voters in predominantly black and traditionally Democrat areas of Jacksonville, Florida.
An elections supervisor in Tallahassee, when shown the list, told Newsnight: “The only possible reason why they would keep such a thing is to challenge voters on election day.”

So what are national Bush/Cheney campaign people doing with Jacksonville voter lists?
The one good thing about this election–in contrast to 2000–is that there’s going to be a boatload of people monitoring the polls during the election, not just after the fact. It’s going to be more difficult for the vote suppressors to get away with doing their dirty work.

President Bush offers an interesting criticism of Senator Kerry: Kerry is guilty of promising to spend more than he can pay for:

During this campaign he’s proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending. Now, that is a trillion with a “T.” That’s a lot even for a senator from Massachusetts. (Laughter.)
So they said, how are you going to pay for it? And he said, oh, we’re just going to tax the rich. Now, you’ve heard that before. Be wary when you hear, oh, we’re just going to tax the rich. My opponent has promised $2.2 trillion, but when you run up the top two brackets, you only raise between $600 billion and $800 billion. There is a gap between that which he promised and that which he can deliver. And guess who usually fills that gap.
AUDIENCE: We do!

Honestly, isn’t President Bush the last person who should be calling someone else out on a gap between what they promise and what they can pay for?