Does that story strike anyone beside me as a little fishy?  
It's not getting much news play.  The sole attacker supposedly detonated himself outside the crypt injuring two or three bystanders.  

In this 9/13/08 post, Fallows cites to legendary military strategist the late John Boyd, interpreted by two of his leading exponents: retired military analyst Chuck Spinney and defense blogger Chet Richards as applied to Obama v. McCain.  
BTW, John Boyd was one of the major Pentagon architects of the stunning military victory over Saddam Hussein in the 1991 Gulf War.
(The link to Fallow's post below provides further internal linking to Richards' Defense and the National Interest blog.)
At issue is whether the McCain abrasively negative and untruthful  campaign is is getting into and operating inside of Obama's "OODA Loop" which in military-speak would be very bad news for Obama.  
The response of these analysts is surprising, and suggests that forecasts of Obama's political discombobulation are perhaps exaggerated, and that in fact, Obama may simply be drawing McCain into eventual self-destruction and reduction to self-parody, even as the media itself begins to question and reject McCain's ferociously negative and untruthful approach.  
The surprise arises from the fact that Spinney, Richard, and their military-industrial cohorts--like the redoubtable Fabius Maximus-- are not hardly Democrats.  
Their harsh disenchantment and angry dissatisfaction with the Bush administration over the economy, the GWOT and mainly the ongoing Iraq War has rapidly spilled over onto the campaign of Mccain and Palin.
It is heartening to realize that people like Spinney, Richards, et al. seem to have more faith in Obama's campaign  than some of the disgruntled Obama supporters at the TPM blog. 
Here's the link:
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/larger_strategic_issues.php

Shorter Halperin: If you're a Democrat, you really just better take it. Because the more you fight back, the worse it's gonna be for you.

Josh, I couldn't agree with you more as far as what what Mr. Halperin is really saying here.  For him, 

when it comes to the politics of attack and smear, the Republicans simply have no peer! 

As badly as Kerry fared in '04, there is no real chance in Halperin's opinion, that Obama will do any better this time around; so he might as well not bother trying to respond. 

But for me, this just underscores the weakness of the Republican approach.  Everything is about campaigning-no holds barred-- to win the upcoming election.  This mindset then carries over into their conduct once in office.  Every executive action becomes part of the campaign for the next time they face the voters.  

In fact, today's Repubs don't actually govern at all:  they campaign.  And that's how we got into this fine mess over the last 8 years.  No governing!

By the same token, Bill Kristol's recent comments about Obama's failure to select Hillary as his VP is, on one level, designed as a grenade rolled under the Democrat's door, but on another level, it all but concedes the Republican's overriding preoccupation with electability as opposed to government.  

With 18 million primary voters in her pocket,  the failure to select HRC is for Kristol a most unwise choice for Obama going into November.

But wait!  What about the difficulty of governing this country that Obama would naturally face if elected  with Hillary as his VP?  With Bill as President Emeritus?  Who would be in charge?

The primary task of an Obama administration is not  getting itself elected in 2008-- then re-elected in 2012-- it is digging the country out of the terrible hole that the never-ending campaigning of the current administration has landed us in!

tks rich