Kerry's vote on defense, from the WSJ

[question everything]

This was published yesterday but did not find it until late at night, therefore do not post on the Breaking News thread, but this can give the answer to all those emails floating around about Kerry's votes.

======
Ads on Kerry's Defense Votes May Backfire

Bush Is Urged to Not Overreach in Attacking His Rival's Senate Record on Foreign Policy

By DAVID ROGERS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 29, 2004; Page A4

(snip)


The attacks on Mr. Kerry bore in on defense and intelligence votes in the 1980s and 1990s, a complex time when many in both parties -- including some Republican hawks and intelligence supporters -- were experimenting with how to adapt to the end of the Cold War and budget deficits that threatened the U.S. economy.

(snip)

When Mr. Kerry arrived in 1985, Republicans -- including the current chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Charles Grassley of Iowa -- were turning against the Reagan buildup. Coming out of Massachusetts, Mr. Kerry closely identified with the movement against nuclear weapons and sought to curb the spread of weapons in space. Mr. Bush's own Homeland Security chief, Tom Ridge, then a Pennsylvania congressman, sometimes took similar positions. And Mr. Kerry aligned himself early with a bipartisan antideficit coalition that felt compelled to cut from defense as well as domestic budgets to be credible.

(snip)

"In 1996, Kerry Introduced Bill to Slash Defense Department Funding by $6.5 Billion," reads one Republican campaign advisory. Yet the three-paragraph bill -- designed to increase funding for community police -- would have taken the money only from "unobligated funds" from military programs added by Congress that were "not requested" by the Defense Department.

Other Kerry-backed deficit-reduction packages relied heavily on cuts in nuclear, not conventional, arms. One amendment sought to trim 2% from what the Republican budget resolution proposed for defense spending over seven years. While Mr. Bush this month accused the senator of wanting to "gut" the national intelligence budget in 1995, the Republican National Committee later said the proposed reduction was about 5%. Independent analysts put it lower. It wasn't uncommon for Republicans themselves in the mid-1990s to shift appropriations from intelligence accounts to pay for defense programs.

(snip)

Coming on the Senate floor for the vote, he was clearly feeling pressure from antiwar forces in the Democratic ranks. But debate over the measure turned almost entirely on the question of $18.4 billion for reconstruction efforts in Iraq, not on the $65 billion in the bill for military and intelligence operations.

(snip)


Write to David Rogers at [e-mail]

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108051625512967419,00.html

[keithyboy]

1. Kerry needs to address these attacks at every call. He needs

to paint the Bush attack dogs as people who shred the truth in favor of smearing opponents because ALL the facts, if known, would show them to be liars and patrons of disinformation for much of their history. Their efforts are spent attacking the opposition and spending little time in Congress or the WH addressing and supporting policies that are actually designed to HELP PEOPLE. Their time is spent on policies to HELP THEMSELVES and their wealthy corporate cronies. What exactly was the last piece of legislation that Republicans passed before the "smoke and mirrors" Medicare Bill to actually help people, to help people preserve their rights, to help people raise their standard of living, to help people help themselves?

[Cary]

2. Yes, I think he must attack the Bush attack dogs.

Good post, keithyboy! The best offense is to expose the attack dogs for what they are.

[question everything]

3. Yes, Kerry cannot let them "define" him

and this point, too, was made in the article.

And... sorry to say this, but Kerry has to dumb down his appearances. Just as with Gore, most voters cannot follow multi-syllables words and complete, intelligent sentences.