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."
| |
John Kerry: Lying, Class Warfare, Divide Amerika Arsehole ! ...
Yep ! He is the true deserter ...
Sounds like Otter defending Delta House before the "double secret probation hearing"... but without the charm... Like Otter, he has no facts on his side.
Don't remember, did Ann Coulter mention Kerry by name in her book, "Treason?"Hmm ?? I'm not sure. I didn't read her book. But ...Kerry was indisputably brave in Vietnam, and it's kind of cute to see Democrats pretend to admire military service. Physical courage, like chastity, is something liberals usually deride, but are tickled when it accidentally manifests itself in one of their own. One has to stand in awe of Kerry's military service 33 years ago. Of course, that's where it ends, including with Kerry -- inasmuch as, upon his return from war in 1970, he promptly began trashing his fellow Vietnam vets by calling them genocidal murderers.
That, from Ann Coulter's recent article ...
That statement in and of itself is John effin Kerry effin joke......
That statement in and of itself is John effin Kerry effin joke......
Don't forget that he also uses Vietnam vets as stage dressing at his public appearances, too...
This is one question that I have had for a long time. Was Kerry's service on a swift boat a cosmic coincidence or was his service some sort of an an attempt on his part to replicate the war record of the other JFK on PT boats in World War Two??
My understanding of why he was "out of it 4 months later" [more like three] is that he had received three minor wounds which got him a legitimate out that would not negatively impact any future political career.
And if America must confront it, it is perhaps optimal that the man who confronts it is not a General Patton or an Audie Murphy but someone who did not charge heedlessly into battle in Vietnam. That is after all true of most baby boomers as well, and if George must make the argument he will do so with due humility in that context.
The argument cannot be, "I went to Vietnam and won a battle singlehandedly--and you should have, too!" The argument must be,
Americans were presented with Hobson's choice in Vietnam. The leadership we had in Washington in those years was not able to restrain itself from lunging into Vietnam, and was not able to execute a winning strategy either. That put the men in our nation's service--and those subject to the draft--in a terrible bind.The Democratic Secretary of Defense in the Clinton Administration resigned in judgement of his own (Black Hawk Down) incompetence and was replaced by a Republican. The Reagan Administration's success in the Cold War entailed an aggressive reversal of course from the Carter Administration. And under SecDef McNamara, Vietnam went from a sideshow to a major American commitment which was FUBAR. In no small part due to the leadership of John Kerry there has not been a competent Democratic Secretary of Defense in fifty years.I went into the Texas Air National Guard as a pilot. Although that trained me to be able to be able to make a contribution in any serious mobilization, and although it exposed me to some risk of serious personal consequences of an operational accident, it also was not a ticket directly to Vietnam. Both before and after I entered the Guard, others served honorably and admirably in Vietnam--and in Washington there is a memorial to the fact that too often their service was ultimately sacrificial.
Others who were subject to the draft law which America discontinued a little later declined to serve and even left the country to avoid that demand. And it fell to President Carter to lance the boil of that terrible unfairness by pardoning all who declined to serve. Yet in redressing that grievance there remained a corresponding unfairness to those who suffered distress and injury in a service which they would not voluntarily have chosen, and especially to those who showed valor in the face of the enemy and were never truly given recognition by society for that service.
So this contest is between two men who were subject to the draft some thirty years ago. One of them served honorably in the National Guard, and has always honored those who served honorably in any capacity because he ruefully views society's need for such service as a necessity. Even while recognizing the fabulous cost in blood and treasure that America has paid in my lifetime and before.
The other man served with some distinction in face of the enemy. But it is not that distinction which has defined his public life. Senator Kerry returned from combat determined that no one else should win recognition in American society for such service--and in all the years since he has never advocated any improvement to military readiness and has never advocated the preferrment of anyone who would advocate military service.
I freely admit that I was not a man of the same serious purpose thirty years ago that I became twenty years ago, and ten years ago when I entered public life--and certainly that I became when the world changed on September 11, now two years past. But I have treated any office I have held--from National Guard officer to president--with respect. I hope that the officers and men of the present active-duty and reserves understand that I hold them in high honor. The last thing that would occur to me, the very last thing that would ever have occured to me, would be to hold any veteran's pride in his or her service to the country as a disqualification for public office. But, hard as it should be to imagine, that is in fact the record of Senator John Kerry.
The Democratic Party now places Senator Kerry's nomination before the country, and the nation will choose as it always has done. But as always is the case, the choice of a president entails judgements about society. Whatever you may think of me, you cannot vote for me without promoting the view that diligence in military affairs is an important part of the mandate of the Federal government. Whatever you think of Senator Kerry, you cannot vote for him without denigrating the idea of provision for the common defense and those who have proudly served it.
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.