The Republican Plan of attack against Kerry

[ringmastery]

Good article describing the areas the republicans will likely criticize Kerry on. Good to know his potential weaknesses and plan accordingly for the attacks.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=6PSFCm6m%2BOxpLbMfiXVyVZ%3D%3D

In all likelihood, they would hammer Kerry for his opposition to mandatory minimum sentences for dealers who sell drugs to children and for voting against the death penalty for terrorists. They would mock his efforts to provide cash benefits to drug addicts and alcoholics, and his onetime opposition to a modest work requirement for welfare recipients. They would trash him for supporting more than half a trillion dollars in tax increases-including hikes in gas taxes and Social Security taxes on ordinary Americans-while accepting free housing and other goodies for himself from friendly influence-peddlers. They would even point out that, when Kerry served as lieutenant governor under one Michael S. Dukakis, Massachusetts famously furloughed more than 500 murderers and sex offenders under a program Kerry later defended as tough.

In fact, they already have.

In 1996, Republican Governor William Weld ran an aggressive campaign for Kerry's Massachusetts Senate seat, blasting him as a soft-on-crime, soft-on-welfare, crazed-on-taxes paleoliberal. He accused Kerry of siding with murderers and junkies over victims and taxpayers; he ran one ad with the slogan: "free rent for kerry. higher taxes for us."

It didn't quite work. Weld was the wrong guy, 1996 was the wrong year, and Massachusetts was the wrong state for a chest-thumping, red-meat, ditch-the-wuss conservative message. Kerry relentlessly linked Weld to the Republican bogeymen Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott, and Bob Dole, energizing his state's powerful labor unions and yellow-dog Democratic establishment, and he managed to escape with a seven-point victory in a state where Bill Clinton thrashed Dole by 34 points. But George W. Bush is not Bill Weld, 2004 is not 1996, and the United States most assuredly is not Massachusetts.

[mikehiggins]

1. You mean America might not vote like Massachusetts does?

Dearie me, and here I thought a liberal Yankee Senator from Taxachusetts was just exactly what we needed to carry the day in November.

Surely I was not wrong?

[stepnw1f]

3. Boy....MA

is getting a really bad rap. Is it the North/South thing? Funny, because I would vote for anybody decent from the south, east, north or west. As long as they are Democrats. Because right now, I am 1 bad situation from ending up in the streets. I lost my job due to a lay-off.

Now you can vote for whomever you want, but good God, don't tell me a Democrat is worse then what we have now. Oh and by the way, All the red states benifit from the blue states due to taxes. If you think you don't have enough funding now, if your in a Red Sate, just wait another 4 years with Bush. Massachusetts is a Blue State. Blue States (Giver) provide for Red Sates (Taker). Lets erase that North/South line once and for all. There are more important issues right now.

[MAlibdem]

7. Screw you

MA rules

[Dagaz]

2. yes but...

As your post states the US is not Mass. Another one we'll be sure to see is from the same debates where Kerry adamately argued against the death penalty for Terrorists. That will play better outside of MA.

[Maat]

4. I'm sorry...I had to reply...

God bless John Kerry for sticking up for judicial discretion! I've been in more courtrooms than most felons will see in a lifetime -- as a social worker and as a law student. Every situation is individual. Please trust me....it is critical that we get rid of the federal mandate re mandatory minimum sentences. Judges have been on the bench a long time, and each one I've seen treats each defendant individually, as they should. The judge knows the difference between an addict getting classified as someone possessing a saleable amount (a dealer?) and the real dealer that the System just happens to get its hands on (and sentences to a long term, as it should be). I once heard a story from a 19-year-old who went over to his friend's house to play volleyball...just as there was a meth raid (and you know what...I believe, knowing that kid, his story...I went on the raid...had to, to help with the kids taken into custody). Anyway...

I appreciate some of the courageous stands Kerrey has taken and I hope that he continues to stick up for he is and was...he has nothing to be ashamed of...especially in front of the Repubs!

[mitchum]

6. Welcome to DU, LawStudentMom

and thank you for a wonderful post

[katieforeman]

5. Edwards looks better all the time.

This is just the beginning of what the Republicns can use against Kerry. He justified his vote against the First Gulf War by saying essentially that a Congressional authorization of military force to strenghten the hand of the President almost inevitably leads to the use of force. He voted for the Second Iraq War to strengthen the President's hand in disarming Iraq. He is quoted in the 1990's saying that the US spends too much on intelligence. He has voted for cuts in defense and intelligence spending. Being Lt. Governor under Dukakis, is the least of his problems.

Even with his admirable military service, he will be weak on defense issues in the general election. Republicans will mine his long voting record and everything he has said during his entire career for ammo to attack his integrity and judegement and to portray him as an elitist who is out of touch with the values of mainstream America.

I like John Kerry and he has served the country well, but I really worry about him in the general election.

[Virgil]

8. The CounterPunch article

This article says Edwards is for repealing NAFTA and Kerry is not. The only other difference the co-editors of CounterPUnch could find was on Botox and medical marijuana.- http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02052004.html

Can you imagine having to listen to Kerry for 4 years when the same thing exist in Edwards? I am for ending NAFTA and for Kerry to say he will evaluate it once he takes office and decide within 120 days is not anywhere near acceptable. I am offended he is a Senator and does not answer, much less a candidate for prez that will not answer.

[usregimechange]

9. mandatory minimum sentences a point of attack?

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy struck the latest blow against mandatory minimum sentences, telling congressional lawmakers Wednesday that required jail terms are partly responsible for much of the prison overcrowding problem in the United States.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/04/09/kennedy.congress/

[usregimechange]

10. Kerry says here he supports terrorist death penalties:

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/001540.html

at the bottom...