"So now Kerry is a traitor? That's a very large and well-greased slippery slope, my friend. What you're saying is that any public figure who speaks out against the war is aiding the enemy because it boosts their morale, correct?
So Kerry's choice is either support the President or aid the enemy?"
Not at all. Kerry's choice is to support the war or be against it. We all know his position has changed as the polls and his opponent have required. The position that has been crafted for him, trying to put all these contradictory statements into a stance that can make sense as something other than political posturing, is indefensible - as Cheney pointed out last night. Look for Kerry's Iraq position (the war is a mistake, but we'll do it better) to be completely destroyed in the next few days.
The first debate benefitted Kerry - most people will say he "won". After that debate even Fox News recognized that the President didn't do well and that Kerry looked and sounded good.
After last night's debate I quickly turned it to CNN - Oh! the spin! Cheney clearly destroyed Kerry/Edwards foreign policy position and their criticisms of the current administration. Cheney had Edwards so flustered that Edwards briefly dropped his Southern accent, blustered a bit and played his Halliburton card out of desperation (although it was clearly not the time to do so). Cheney annhilated Edwards in the foreign policy part of the debate, but CNN and their spin doctors were downplaying that as much as they could.
The domestic policy was a different story. Edwards was able to speak to populist themes there, on issues that always favor Democrats/liberals/progressives. Cheney did OK, but conservative views on stuff like health care, welfare, unemployment, etc... don't have the pop that, "Elect me and I'll tax the rich and give you everything for free!", does.
One point that Edwards skewered the Republicans on was the gay marriage thing. They're right that it was a calculated political move.
That's my take on it anyways.