A great excerpt here from The Opinion Journal: Best of the Web.

Senator Quagmire
Although Sen. John Kerry voted last October to authorize the president to use force in Iraq, as soon as it became clear that the president was actually going to act on that authority, Kerry joined his party's defeatist chorus. During yesterday's debate, journalist Ed Gordon asked Kerry to explain his vote in light of his subsequent opposition to liberating Iraq. Here is his answer, in full:

The vote is the vote. I voted to authorize. It was the right vote, and the reason I mentioned the threat is that we gave the--we had to give life to the threat. If there wasn't a legitimate threat, Saddam Hussein was not going to allow inspectors in. Now, let me make two points if I may. Ed [Gordon] questioned my answer. The reason I can't tell you to a certainty whether the president misled us is because I don't have any clue what he really knew about it, or whether he was just reading what was put in front of him. And I have no knowledge whether or not this president was in depth--I just don't know that. And that's an honest answer, and there are serious suspicions about the level to which this president really was involved in asking the questions that he should've.

With respect to the question of, you know, the vote--let's remember where we were. If there hadn't been a vote, we would never have had inspectors. And if we hadn't voted the way we voted, we would not have been able to have a chance of going to the United Nations and stopping the president, in effect, who already had the votes, and who was obviously asking serious questions about whether or not the Congress was going to be there to enforce the effort to create a threat. So I think we did the right thing. I'm convinced we did.

There actually is a simple explanation for Kerry's behavior: In October he believed supporting Iraq's liberation would be politically expedient; by the spring, he realized that opposing America's effort was much more appealing to Democratic primary voters. He can't just say he was changing his position for political reasons, so he is making the logically untenable claim that he's been consistent all along.

Thus when asked to explain his thinking on the most important issue of the day, the haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietnam, is reduced to incoherent blather. Poor John Kerry has sunk into a verbal quagmire.