And so Mr. Kerry abruptly will have to talk grandly of what he would have done to make us more secure.

Why would he want or need to do this? What he wants to do with the world we have now is the only thing that matters. You don't run for President by promising to do things better four years ago.

More likely, if President Bush loses, the war against terror will return, as promised, to the status of a police matter — subpoenas and court trials the more appropriate response to the mass murder of 3,000 at the "crime scene" of the crater in New York. Europe will be assured that our troops will stay while we apologize for the usual litany of purported unilateral sins. North Korea will get more blackmail cash, while pampered South Korean leftists resume their "sunshine" mirage. Iraq will be turned over to the U.N. as we abruptly leave, and could dissolve into something like the Balkans. . . .

Etc. etc. etc.

This is fortune telling. Of course, he may look into his crystal ball all he wishes. The problem is, he uses the future indicative tense, which strongly implies that this is how it will be.

As we all know, no one knows the future. A show of hands: who here has a different worldview than the one he or she held on September 10, 2001? My hand is up. Anyone else's?

I would be willing to think that, were he asked that question, Mr. Kerry's hand would be up too.

This man is a Democrat the way Mel Gibson's dad is a Catholic.