As usual, Richard Cohen comes up with the most serious critique of the proceedings in New York.

Cohen says, basically, that Republicans are giving no details, no plans, no reason to believe that they are capable of winning the war on terror. Further, Cohen charges that there is no admission from Republicans that, while there have been no attacks on American soil since 9/11, the terrorists have succeeded in striking elsewhere often--and at great cost to both America and its allies.

Cohen is right and his criticism is fair, but it misses one political reality: Since John Kerry has been equally bereft of specifics, Republicans need only convince voters that they actually treat the war on terror like a war. As the contest is shaping up, it isn't a question of a difference in methods, but a difference in purposes between the two candidates.