Kerry in the crosshairs (RNC speech drops anti-Dean comments)

[papau]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/mgrind.day.thu/index.html

The Morning Grind
Kerry in the crosshairs

By Steve Turnham CNN Political Unit
Thursday, January 29, 2004 Posted: 9:31 AM EST (1431 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie delivers another broadside against John Kerry today at the RNC winter meeting in Washington. We can summarize it in a single tried and true phrase: "soft on defense." <snip>

"As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kerry shared the assessment of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein," Gillespie will say, according to excerpts. "He voted for the use of force in Iraq, then later tried to say it was a vote to 'threaten' the use of force, and then ultimately declared himself an 'anti-war' candidate."

But wait, there's more: "In 1972, when John Kerry first campaigned for Congress, he made a commitment to vote against military appropriations. After he was elected, he went one step further, actively introducing legislation to reduce funding for defense and intelligence."

Gillespie helpfully tracks the Kerry record through the years -- from the no nukes '80s to the budget-cutting '90s. And concludes (at least we think it's a conclusion): "His long Senate record belies his assertion that his approach to national security will make us safer as a nation."

Gillespie's speech was to have included a couple of snipes against Howard Dean, too. They weren't in the bits we saw. Maybe the RNC thought, "Why bother?" <snip>

[Fleshdancer]

1. Gillespie is an idiot.

I don't trust men who don't have chins.

[TheDonkey]

2. It's time for Dems to start aggresively attacking the RNC & spaceshrub

again.

During the Plamegate, and Yellowcakegate there was a lot of Bush bashing on the airwaves and it was great. Recently with the primaries that bashing has turned into infighting.

Time to focus on the REAL enemy again as they are not going to wait around until our convention.

[bluestateguy]

3. Let the Clelanding begin...

Its up to Kerry whether or not they succeed.

[CWebster]

4. That's what happens when you try to have it every way.

If you want to play on their playground, you have to play by their rules. Kerry wanted to strut his stuff as strong on national security by military experience rather than define national security in terms of diplomacy and cooperative effort. He just had to show up Bush and now he can be called out for his inconsistancies. It is all on the record and because he constantly tries to be all things he can be attacked by all sides.

[sangh0]

5. Yes, and it really hurt Kerry in IA and NH

Who knows? Maybe if you repeat that rant long enough, someone else will believe you