Kerry and his military/intel voting record are a HUGE TARGET

[digno dave]

The more i hear and read about Kerry's voting record on military and intelligence spending the more i cringe about the idea of Rove painting him as a daisy waiving zen-meister. There is a definite trend here that doesn't look good at all when you consider we are at war and people are easliy terrified into believing anything they are told.
Kerry voted to cut intelligence spending AFTER 9-11.
In the 80s he voted against funding the F-15, F-16, B-1 bomber, etc. These are all staples of our military today. What did he propose our pilots fly in, weather baloons?
Rove is going to tear us a new one.
How do you propose Kerry defends himself against this?

[eileen_d]

1. "A daisy waving zen-meister"

Will those be Rove's exact words? I hope so, I need another good laugh tonight.

P.S. I think Kerry's got it covered.

[ShaneGR]

2. Repeat after me: War hero and no WMD

War hero and no WMD.

War hero and no WMD.

War hero and no WMD.

They can try to paint him all they want, it won't work.

[MercutioATC]

3. Repeat after me: Bush: "Thanks for your support" (NCLB, IWR, Patriot Act)

NCLB, IWR, Patriot Act

NCLB, IWR, Patriot Act

NCLB, IWR, Patriot Act

They don't have to "paint" anything. All they have to do is state the facts.

[eileen_d]

4. How does this relate to the original topic?

Signed: Curious

[MercutioATC]

7. The same way "War hero and no WMD" does....

Signed: Amused

[eileen_d]

9. I see

And yet the original topic was about how Kerry will be painted as "weak on defense." Will Kerry's votes for the legislation you mentioned have that effect?

[krkaufman]

17. 4-years in the military 30 years ago...

> And yet the original topic was about how Kerry will
> be painted as "weak on defense."

Actually, the original poster was looking for specific information on how we would be able to respond to the facts of Kerry voting to cut military and intelligence spending, rather than the more nebulous "weak on defense" slur.

Kerry's having been a war hero 30 years ago during his 4-years in the Navy, in Vietnam, won't answer the question. The ROG will be able to agree that Kerry *WAS* a war hero, but will reply that "he tossed that aside when he returned from Vietnam, colluding with Hanoi Jane in undercutting military efforts in Vietnam, and has continued undercutting national security through his votes in the Senate."

Simply saying that Kerry was a war hero will likely not be sufficient.

[eileen_d]

18. Well, I never suggested "simply saying that Kerry was a war hero"

Kerry's record is much stronger than that.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

6. Bush has to answer for those things, not Kerry

Bush is the President and HE is responsible for what happens in HIS administration. Those issues rest squarely on HIS shoulders.

[MercutioATC]

8. I'm sorry, I thought Congress passed legislation....

...and I thought that Edwards and Kerry voted for these particular pieces of legislation.

Seems to me, Bush had some help here...

[Mobius]

10. i agree

same goes for Clark 10 fold.
I guess that makes Clark better. More of a war hero and no WMD. Wait, if Kerry didn't believe there were WMD, why did he vote in favor of the IWR like Edwards did? That makes Clark ALOT BETTER than Kerry and Edwards. Simple logic ;)

[isbister]

15. All they have to do is state the facts

So bush will say?

NCLB - I worked with Teddy Kennedy and the rest of the Congress to get this bill passed. They shouldn't whine because I won't fund it.

IWR - Its not important that I violated the conditions set by Congress in the resolution, I'm the President and can do what I want.

Patriot Act - I have to allow Ashcroft to abuse the loopholes in this Act because if I don't it will make it a lot more difficult to abuse people's rights and strengthen our grip on power.

[digno dave]

5. war hero will take you so far

If the electorate can look past *'s drinking and drugging in the 80s then they can look past a war hero's efforts 35 years ago as well.

[politick]

11. not when his patriotism

is called into question by W. or his people. Then it becomes, "Oh yeah, where were you when I was dragging bodies out of the Mekong delta? Oh, drinking Miller Hi-Life and blasting lines while you ducked out on military duty? Hmm. Oh, what was that you were saying about patriotism and sending kids off to war...?"
I can't wait for that. Even if I don't like Kerry.

[isbister]

16. war hero can only take you so far

but isn't there more to it than war hero alone.

How about comparing records when it comes to standing up for veterans?

Kerry's service and record show that he will be a champion for veterans in the White House. When this is compared to bush's service, empty talk and his record of cutting veteran's benefits...there's not much of a contest.

[bluestateguy]

12. For starters

We need to challenge the assumption that "more spending"= national security. If this is going to be a Penatgon spending contest we will always lose. That's one area where Republicans will always ensure that they position themselves on the right flank. The assumption that must be challenged is the one that says all weapons must be assumed to be good weapons that work, and the assumption that says the more we spend the stronger our military will be. Conservatives always like to say that you don't get good schools by spending until the cows come home. Maybe it's time they apply that lesson to the Pentagon.

[eileen_d]

13. Definitely!

And ironically, stories of soldiers in Iraq being short on supplies come to mind. :(

[krkaufman]

19. Yet another reason I'm for _ W E S _ C L A R K _ for President

> We need to challenge the assumption that
> "more spending"= national security.

Exactly what Clark is saying; Pentagon spending needs to be more effective. Pentagon waste will *have* to be addressed to gain control of discretionary spending.

See this transcript from 'NOW with Bill Moyers' for background on Pentagon waste:
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript245_full.html
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/spinney.html

[Dr Fate]

20. "throwing money at schools"

How bout "throwing money at the Pentagon" as a talking point?

[digno dave]

23. yes, but...

that'a why i specifically mention the F-15, F-16, and B-1 bomber. These are not considered excesses by anyone. These are useful items in the armed services.

[tobius]

14. His defense is

"offensive". Every time I hear a new explanation that defies common sense for what seems like one more vote, statement, or position that was in step when it was made but is "mis characterized" now... :puke: This along with his tendency to make his arguments as if he is on the Senate floor, when the public is not looking for legalese but commonsense stances that come from principle not expediency.
K :spank: Rove

[DrFunkenstein]

21. Kerry Has Already Smacked This Down On Fox News

Kerry's performance on Fox News against a grilling interview should put to rest fears by those genuinely concerned about Kerry's performance (and not just trying to imply he is unelectable).

The whole interview is worth it just to see someone refuse to take crap from the right wing media, but here is the part specifically on this issue:

WALLACE: Let's talk about national security. In 1995, you were the only sponsor of a bill to cut $1.5 billion from intelligence spending over the next five years.

KERRY: Right.

WALLACE: And in 1997, you said that the intelligence apparatus was too big...

KERRY: Absolutely.

WALLACE: ... there were higher priorities.

KERRY: Right.

WALLACE: And then in 2001, after 9/11, you complained and said, "Why wasn't our intelligence better?"

KERRY: Let me tell you exactly why I did that. I went to Moscow shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union. I got out of an airplane, and I looked around me, and there wasn't a light, barely, that worked in the airport. There wasn't a new truck in the parking lots.

I went to the foreign office, and there were 12 telephones on a desk. And I asked, "This guy must be really important. Why does he have 12 phones?" They said, "Because they don't know how to hook up all the phone lines into one phone."

And this was the country that we supposedly had to fear marching through Poland...

WALLACE: But the intelligence, obviously, could have helped against the...

(CROSSTALK)

KERRY: Intelligence failed us, because — I was on the Intelligence Committee. What we were trying to do, some of us, was push the funding not into technical means — there was a fascination always with satellites and listening devices, not with human intelligence.

I've always been somebody who has felt that we needed human intelligence. That's our failure. That was the failure with respect to 9/11. That remains the greatest gap in our intelligence.

So I wanted to reduce some spending from the national technical means and change the culture of our intelligence gathering. I believe we need to strengthen that, obviously now, post-9/11, but I wrote a book in 1996, Chris, called "The New War," and in that book, after that vote, I wrote about how we needed to strengthen our ability to be able to fight international criminal crime, including terror. In fact, I wrote a chapter called "The Globalization of Terror," and I said, four years before New York, it'll take one megaterrorist event in one of our cities to change life as we know it in America.

I think we deserve a president who does see ahead and who knows how to allocate resources correctly.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109430,00.html

[digno dave]

24. won't fly

That's all fine and dandy, but a 30 second commercial hammering Kerry for not voting to budget aforementioned items will be more effective that any explanation Kerry may or may not be able to get on a news talk show. It could easily be construed as trying to spin his way out of the topic.
"Well, i'm all about being more selective when it comes to defense spending...blah blahblah." That won't fly. Too nuanced of an explanation.

[sandnsea]

25. Gadgets instead of human intelligence

It WILL fly and people see it clearly now more than ever. George Tenet just got up and gave a speech which included the fact that we need more human intelligence. He was right on his CIA vote. And what he voted against was another billion dollars spent secretly so nobody even knew what they were doing with it.

On the weapons back in the 80's. Deficits out of control, remember? Alot of those bills also included nuclear spending which he was totally opposed to and was also right. Now we're spending millions, if not billions, destroying nuclear weapons that we spent millions or billions producing. Stupid. Responsible military budgets, that's what he advocates. And don't forget John McCain stands on the floor of the senate every session and reads his military pork list. Alot of pork in the military and everybody knows it.

We can't be cowards and John Kerry is the only candidate I see who will stand up and be proud of traditional Democratic values and point out where we've been trying to go for the last thirty years when Republicans were fighting us every step of the way.

[tobius]

27. Humint

human intelligence is a strong argument, now. If he continues down that road though, after the intelligence restructuring in the 70's it will look typical of him. Remember the arguments against using agents with any scent of "dirty hands"? Where was his push to allow the stronger use of people that were or are part of "the bad guys"?

[emulatorloo]

22. "Kerry Dismisses GOP Criticism on Defense" - Washington Post

<snip>

Kerry said he has a long record of not only backing defense spending but voting for smarter spending programs.

"Unfortunately, there are people who have never met a weapons system they didn't like. I have," he said. "If the worst thing they can do is pull out a couple of votes ... let's have at it."

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60753-2004Jan29.html

[NashVegas]

26. If That's the Case

When do you suppose the arrows will start flying?