ìBush endorses idea of intelligence czar: ëWe are a nation in danger,í he says,î by Judy Keen, USA Today, 3 Aug, p. 1A.

ìKerry criticizes Bushís pace in war on terror: Compaires his own ideas with those of 9/11 Commission,î by Jill Lawrence, USA, 3 Aug, p. 2A.

ìSecurity Alert as Double-Edged Sword: Some Democrats See Terror Issue As Tool Of Partisan Politics; Crying Worlf?" By Jackie Calmes and Jacob M. Schlesinger, Wall Street Journal, 3 Aug, p. A4.

ìKerry Acting Out of Necessity In Tackling the Terrorism Issue,î by John F. Harris, Washington Post, 3 Aug, p. A9.

The latest and very specific terrorist alert seems plenty real and plenty warranted, but it does raise a troubling question that both campaign staffs have apparently considered at length: the question of what a major terrorist strike would do to the election.

It seems the Bush camp decided a while back that it would be dangerous to run a campaign too heavy on national security, especially when the economy was picking up. But then Kerry comes out swinging so hard on the subject at his convention, only to see what should have been a substantial bounce in the polls simply not materialize on that basis (i.e., heavy on war, light on Bush bashing).

So now it seems the Bush camp is feeling awfully strong on defense, and is far less concerned about appearing to run on that basis. Even Kerryís camp admits that any attack will inevitably favor the incumbent in a rally-around-the-flag push. Knowing how al Qaeda has pushed the notion of tipping elections in its grand strategy to get the West out of the Middle East (having proved it could do so in Spain), you have to wonder whether or not all this talk/response/election dynamics isnít whetting their appetite to strike. Osama and his crew seem to make no secret of their sense that a Bush win is good for them, believing as they do that a second Bush Administration will only isolate America more in the worldís eyes.

But that may be a fantasy wish on their part. The correction is coming in U.S. national security strategy, no matter who gets elected, and a Bush not facing another election may be a wild card that al Qaeda may soon regret.

If I were Bush I would run hard on the terror war, because heís proven he can absorb the 9/11 Commissionís report with little damage to his standing, co-opting those proposals he wants and ignoring the restóby and large. Nothing particularly new or wrong in that. Presidents have been cherry-picking recommendations from blue-ribbon panels forever, and no amount of John Kerry saying ìI said it earlier!î is going to steal any of Bushís thunder on the subject.