Let’s see if Kerry leverages this upcoming interview.

In the New York Times today, an article about the Kerry organization and his apparent lack luster performance lately quotes the senator regarding the war on terror.

“Well, ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you something,” Mr. Kerry said. “We can, we must and we will win the war on terror. And the way to win the war on terror is to fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. And that begins by having a president who brings other nations to our side to share the risk, to share the responsibility, to share the burden, share the cost. And I understand that working with other countries is not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength, and that’s what we’re going to do.”

Everything in that quote speaks to military might. That’s a rear-guard action. After all, we didn’t really engage terrorists until they killed 3,000 Americans in one day.

A smarter answer would have been:

“Well, ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you something. We can, we must and we will win the war on terror. And the way to win the war on terror is to fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. And that begins by winning the hearts and minds of the Muslim world. Once the terrorists lose widespread support among moderate Muslims, the war on terrorism is half won.

We must address legitimate grievances such as the Palestinian question and Arab governments that repress freedom.

We must actively seek a Palestinian homeland.

While we advocate for Arab democracies, we respect Islamic teachings and recognize that such democracies may not look like ours but would be embraced by Muslim moderates.

We must provide aid to Muslims living in extreme poverty. Their desperation only helps breed more terrorists.

We must focus our military might where it is most effective – finding and eliminating terrorists leaders such as Osama bin Laden.

The vast majority of Muslims want we want – security, prosperity, peace and freedom. We must prove we’re willing to help them achieve it. Without that commitment, our children’s children will still be dying in Bush’s misguided war on terror.”

Much chatter last night and this morning about the apparent differences between the coverage of the GOP campaign and the Democrats last month. More than 400 comments are on Daily KOS about it. Seems many folks remember every speech by the Democrats being followed by in-studio GOP spokespersons on the networks and cable to denounce them. No such thing last night or Monday, except for Sen. George Mitchell on CNN.

Media Matters sent a letter to CNN asking that the same format hold for both conventions.

Also, I’ve seen little coverage of the Democratic war room as we did with the GOP one.

Campaign Desk this morning argues that even Tom Brokaw (I’m not sure why I say “even’ as most top-paid reporters are as bad as rookies) lets the GOP get away with misleading statements.

Brokaw asked [Bush strategist Karen] Hughes about Bush’s consistency (or lack thereof) on the question of whether the war on terror can ever be definitively “won.” In response, Hughes asserted, “We’ve captured two-thirds of the members of al Qaeda.”

Political gunslingers routinely take a grain of truth and massage it into a pearl. But in this case, Hughes took the art one step farther — she started with an official Republican talking point that is months old and through the process of strategic condensation, converted it into a startling (and undocumented) new declaration. And Brokaw, an old hand who should know every trick in a political operative’s arsenal — even an operative as slick as Hughes — let it slide.

The official talking point that has been flowing from the mouths of Bush administration officials and Bush campaign surrogates for months refers to the supposed capture of two-thirds of the pre-Sept. 11 al Qaeda leadership, not to al Qaeda’s entire troop strength. Chapter Two of the White House’s “Record of Achivement” report released last Friday reads, “Of the senior al Qaeda and associated leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators [that] the United States has been tracking, more than two-thirds have been detained, captured, or killed.” (Emphasis added.)

This is a point Kerry should make: We’re creating more terrosits than we can kill, and there is no evidence that we are changing the minds of young and moderate Muslims that we are on a crusade against a religion and a culture we think is somehow less than Christianity and our moral fiber.

Stories are beginning to appear that Kerry’s campaign is running scared, afraid that the lies of the Swift Boat Vets and the president’s convention are whittling away at his reputation and the narrow lead Kerry had opened up after the Democratic convention.

Ron Fournier, in a story this morning suggests Kerry may be paralyzed by conflicting advice.

The candidate and his beleaguered staff are being flooded with advice, much of it contradictory. Some party officials want Kerry to criticize the president for sitting out the Vietnam War in the Texas Air National Guard. Others say that would draw unwanted attention to accusations about Kerry’s combat experience, when the focus should be on the economy and the Iraq war.

…Some Democrats pointed to Kerry’s public assurances, under pressure from Bush, that he still would have voted to authorize war in Iraq had he known no weapons of mass destruction would be found there. Still, after months of criticizing the president’s handling of the war, Kerry’s assertion sounded like a flip-flop to many voters, according to polling and focus groups conducted for Democrats close to Kerry.

.. [Frank Schreck, a top party fund-raiser from Nevada,] wants Kerry to bluntly compare war records with the president. “Why not stand up there and say, `He chose to have his father get him out of harm’s way while I volunteered to risk my life?'” The Bush campaign vigorously denies the president used his family’s political influence to avoid Vietnam.

Ken Brock, a Democratic consultant in Michigan, said he wants to see Kerry fight back.

“Personally, I’m for somebody coming out and saying while Bush was in the Redneck Riviera, Kerry was picking shrapnel out of his butt,” he said. “There are those who want John Kerry to drop his drawers and show America the scars.”

Certainly, the mainstream media has some culpability for reporting and hyping the Swift Boat ads before they had done their homework. The articles pointing out that there is little substantiation of the charges do as much harm as good by continuing to publicize the charges.

But Kerry’s inarticulate positions are his biggest problem. In fact, he is not only inarticulate but wrong when saying he would still authorize Bush to go to war in Iraq. And he has been vague about how he would handle terrorism. He needs to clearly challenge the notion that only physical war is the answer. We can’t kill enough terrorists to stop terrorism. But Kerry hasn’t clearly made that case.

Update: Josh Marshall has a post on this issue, where he advises Democrats “[d]iscipline pays rewards.”

Indeed, it does, but that doesn’t negate the fact that Kerry has been far too cautious, or simply misguided regarding some of his stands.