More nuance from Sen. Kerry

Senator Kerry has sent clear signals that he intends to run again in 2008, so it is fair to assume that everything he does in the near future is intended to advance that effort. This election year, he obviously had a problem explaining his shifting positions on the war in Iraq. So now, consider this.

Condoleezza Rice was overwhelmingly endorsed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today to be the next secretary of state, but only after some spirited exchanges signaled that Iraq will be a divisive issue in President Bush's second term.

The 16-to-2 vote by the panel cleared the way for Ms. Rice to be confirmed by the full Senate . .

The "no" votes by Senators Boxer and Kerry were no surprise, given their sharp questioning of Ms. Rice on the reasons for going to war against Iraq, the prosecution of the war, and the peacekeeping operations that have caused more American deaths than the war itself.

In August, Kerry was saying that he would have voted to authorize the war even knowing what we know now (i.e, that Saddam did not have WMD). Now he is aligning himself with Sen. Boxer.

What is going on and how could this possibly help him in 2008? There is no way, at this point, that he can run as the anti-Iraq war Democrat in 2008, is there?

(For cross-post at Centerfield and comments posted there, click here.)