Posted on 02/22/2004 12:43:07 AM PST by Happy2BMe
Kerry Defends His National Security Voting Record
Sat February 21, 2004 11:06 PM ET
|
|
|
|
ATLANTA (Reuters) - Democratic White House front-runner John Kerry on Saturday forcefully defended his record on national security and drew a sharp contrast between his service in Vietnam and "Republicans who didn't serve in any war."
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a leading Georgia Republican speaking for President Bush's re-election campaign, predicted Kerry's "32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems" would not play well in the state's primary on March 2.
In a conference call arranged by the Bush campaign, Chambliss said voters would be looking at the four-term Massachusetts senator's voting record and "beyond what he says."
"I don't know what it is about what these Republicans who didn't serve in any war have against those of us who are Democrats who did," Kerry told reporters shortly after he arrived in Atlanta.
"Saxby Chambliss on behalf of the president and his henchmen decided today to question my commitment to the defense of our nation," he said. "I'm not going to stand by and allow these Republicans who continually go to the low road to challenge my commitment."
Flanked by a couple of dozen elected Georgia officials who have endorsed him, Kerry defended his record in the Senate, saying he had voted for the biggest defense and intelligence budgets in U.S. history.
"While sometimes I may have voted for commonsense in order to make some changes, no one is going to question my commitment to the defense of this nation," he said.
Kerry has won 15 of the 17 Democratic primaries and caucuses so far and is the clear leader in money and momentum. He has a good chance of wrapping up the nomination on March 2 when 10 states, including New York, California, Georgia and Ohio hold contests.
A volunteer in Vietnam, Kerry has campaigned on his combat record as a navy lieutenant, which includes three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star.
Bush's own service in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war became an issue in the campaign recently when Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe accused him of being "AWOL" from his duties.
In response, the White House released hundreds of pages of Bush's service records and Kerry said at a debate earlier this week that he would not raise the issue of Bush's service. On Saturday night, Kerry told reporters he was specifically referring to "Saxby Chambliss, (Vice President) Dick Cheney and a whole bunch of people who are very busy challenging the patriotism of Democrats who question the policy in Iraq."
"It's not about a war 34 years ago," he said. "It's about a war we're engaged in today."
But in a letter to Bush, Kerry accused the president and his re-election campaign of initiating a widespread attack on his service in Vietnam and his subsequent decision to speak out against that war.
He offered to debate Bush face-to-face on "the Vietnam era and the impact of our experiences on our approaches to presidential leadership."
Pointing out that Vietnam had been a painful and difficult period in U.S. history, Kerry added: "It is hard to believe that you would choose to reopen these wounds for your personal political gain. But that is what you have chosen to do."
| | |
I thouht he has been AWOL from the Senate the past year and hasn't cast many votes.
Yes, it's about a war we're engaged in today that we wouldn't be able to fight if Kerry had his way.
***Kerry for Senate 1984 Document: Kerry on Defense***
SENATOR KERRY FOUGHT TO SLASH INTELLIGENCE FUNDING BY AT LEAST $2.5 BILLION
As opposed to democrats that didn't serve in any war?
Kerry's desperation is showing and this isn't going to play well at all with any Republicans or independents. It *will* drive more voters to the voting booths, though. To vote for Bush.
And the reporters replied, "But Senator Kerry, isn't it true that you opposed President Reagan every inch of the way to his victory in the Cold War?" </sarcasm>
A volunteer in Vietnam, Kerry has campaigned on his combat record as a navy lieutenant, which includes three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star.. . . and then comes this lovely sentiment:. . . "I don't know what it is about what these Republicans who didn't serve in any war have against those of us who are Democrats who did," Kerry told reporters shortly after he arrived in Atlanta.
Pointing out that Vietnam had been a painful and difficult period in U.S. history, Kerry added: "It is hard to believe that you would choose to reopen these wounds for your personal political gain. But that is what you have chosen to do."So having told everyone who would listen not to go to fight Communists in Vietnam, and having supported a draft dodger for election and re-election as president, you now question the manhood of someone who did not go to fight in Vietnam. You're a real piece of work, pickle-breath.
He offered to debate Bush face-to-face on "the Vietnam era and the impact of our experiences on our approaches to presidential leadership."Oh no! A devastating debater is going to rip poor, wimpy little George's lungs out! </sarcasm>
. . . "I don't know what it is about what these Republicans who didn't serve in any war have against those of us who are Democrats who did," Kerry told reporters shortly after he arrived in Atlanta.. . . as opposed to a Democrat who dodged the draft to not serve in any war.
Don't fall for the trap. Kerry's tactic is to talk about his service in Vietnam every time a question comes up talking about his voting record. None of what the GOP is saying has anything to do with his service or his protests of Vietnam, but that is what Kerry twists it into. The GOP is questioning Kerry's voting record. Stay on target.
And he opposed Gulf War too, after which we found Saddam was a lot closer to making nuclear weapons then we had thought. As much as people criticize the first Gulf War for not finishing the job, it was critical in stopping Saddam from being a nuclear power today, which he certainly would have.
Yes, and he points out that Bush wasn't there, and is happy enough for the Democrats known as journalists to investigate the momentous issue of exactly what Bush did thirty years ago. Well, as recently as twenty years ago we wouldn't have put Bush forward as a candidate for so much as sheriff--twenty years ago, Bush was just deciding that he would be sober for the rest of his life. Within ten years of that decision Bush was getting elected governor of Texas, and he has spent the last ten years as cheif executive of Texas and of the US government.he now wants to hide behind the same medals he pretended to throw back in our face.
As far as I am concerned he did throw those medals back. He wanted that believed at the time, and I believe it. Whether or not he can now prove otherwise, as a moral point he threw those medals back in our face, told everyone not to go to war in Vietnam and, as much as anyone, helped assure that no candidate--at least no Democratic candidate--for public office has since had to defend his war record--which is exactly the opposite of the experience after WWII.No, that's not true. What he assured was that no Democrat could become a candidate if they did have a war record, and did not renounce it. And tried to establish that no Republican candidate should run as a Cold Warrior unless he had been killed in Vietnam first.
I am not a Vietnam vet so I hope some of the vets here can answer a couple of questions for me. 1. Since Kerry had political aspirations but didn't believe in the war before going into the Navy, and had political aspirations and didn't believe in the war after he got out of the Navy; why did he volunteer for Vietnam? 2. Kerry ordered his swift boat to attack the enemy head on putting not only himself but his men in great danger. It was his choice not his men's. He received a medal. Shouldn't he have put his crew in for a commendation as well? 3. Was the action taken by Kerry to put his men in increased danger standard practice for Swift boats? 4. Was his service in the Navy for love of country or to add to his resume? A man judges by what he sees and hears but God weighs the motive.
Absolutely.The GOP is questioning Kerry's voting record.
As well they should. But the truth is that the Democratic Party bought what Kerry was selling in his medal-repudiation. And that was, that no one should be elected as a Cold Warrior unless he had been killed in Vietnam first.Several blitzkrieg successes later, the Vietnam Syndrome which Kerry helped initiate still is the template into which the establishment known as journalism tries to fit the world. And that is exactly what Bush is fighting in Iraq; without the journalistic establishment adhering to that template the Ba'athists would have had no hope from the day Saddam's statue fell. Half the casulaties we've had in Iraq are due to that template, and there really is no choice but to confront it.
Really?. I, personally, was unaware of the French Looking Senator's contributions to our military.
Oh, wait a minute. I believe I recall that the Senator fired a campaign advisor who suggested that people are starting to
get turned off and even parody the Senator's constant drone of Vietnam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.