Posted on 03/05/2004 5:34:23 PM PST by pixmo
WASHINGTON – John Kerry has been described as a waffler who blathers, a son of privilege who won't stand up to millionaires, a Washington insider who's a handmaiden to special interests and an inconsistent candidate whose word is no good.
All of that comes from fellow Democrats.
They ran against Kerry in the presidential primary race but now are pledged to help elect him president. The also-rans in the race for the party's presidential nomination have supplied plenty of rhetorical ammunition that Republicans could refire in the fall campaign, although the strategy is not without risks.
It happens every primary election season, to one degree or another: Rivals for their party's nomination criticize one another, then drop out, shake hands, plaster a smile on their faces and close ranks behind whoever ultimately gets the prize. All those nasty sound bites are forgotten, unless somebody from the other side decides to dredge them up.
'Never Plays It Straight'
Here is what Wesley Clark had to say about Kerry (and fellow rival John Edwards) on Feb. 5: "The American people don't want another Washington insider who never plays it straight. They don't want a follower who makes decisions by licking his finger and sticking it up in the wind."
This is what Clark had to say about Kerry eight days later, after abandoning his own quest for the presidency: "I believe John Kerry has the right experience, the right values and the right leadership and character to beat George W. Bush."
More comments from Clark:
"We need leadership that will take responsibility in this country, and I'm very disturbed that John did not do that." – on Kerry's comments related to racial preferences.
"With all due respect, he's a lieutenant, and I'm a general."
Maybe Because They Are Millionaires
"Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards are good men, but they don't have the leadership to stand up to millionaires."
"I don't think people understand in this country how politicians in Washington can say one thing and do something else."
"Part of the Washington way of doing things." – again on Kerry and Edwards.
Edwards, known as the nice guy in the campaign, soft-pedaled his criticisms, but nonetheless was happy to cast the four-term senator from Massachusetts as "somebody who spent most of their life in politics" and unlikely to bring about needed changes. Stressing his own working-class upbringing, Edwards argued on Feb. 24, "this is something that crowd in Washington just doesn't get."
One week later, when he dropped out of the race, Edwards praised Kerry as a man who has "fought for and will continue to fight for the things that all of us believe in. ... The truth of the matter is that John Kerry has what it takes, right here in his heart, to be president of the United States."
Tool of Lobbyists
More comments from Edwards:
"What he's saying now [on trade] is different than what he did in the past."
"Do you believe that change is more likely to be brought about by someone who has spent 20 years in Washington or by someone who is more of an outsider to this process?"
"I don't take contributions from lobbyists. He obviously does."
"I think he's said some different things at different points in time. So I think there's been some inconsistency."
Some of the harshest criticism of Kerry came from former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who pledged to support the Democrat nominee when he pulled out of the race. Despite a considerable amount of bad blood between the two candidates, Dean said Wednesday that he'll be visiting Kerry in Boston next week to help map strategy for beating President Bush.
'His Word Is No Good'
Here's a sampling of what Dean had to say about Kerry in earlier days:
"President Kerry. Please, spare us."
"He's going to turn out to be just like George Bush."
"John Kerry is part of the corrupt political culture in Washington."
"It appears that his word is no good."
"I'm just incensed by his hypocrisy."
"This is not the person we need to head the Democratic Party. I think Senator Kerry is clearly not the person to carry the banner of the Democratic Party because he has acted so much like a Republican."
"Senator Kerry apparently supports the kind of corrupt fund raising, politically corrupt fund-raising mechanisms that George Bush has also employed."
"We are not going to beat George Bush by nominating someone who is the handmaiden of special interests."
"A special-interest clone."
"A candidate of no principle."
"Just another inside-the-Beltway guy who's played the game for 15 years."
Other Democrat also-rans now backing Kerry include Rep. Dick Gephardt and Sen. Joe Lieberman. That would be the same Gephardt whose mailings said Kerry is "no friend to family farmers" and the same Lieberman who called Kerry a "waffler."
'Cheap Sound Bites'
More comments from Gephardt:
"We can keep pursuing George Bush's tired, old, failed economic policies like Senator Kerry and other Democrats in this race have suggested. Or we can learn from the policies that worked for us."
"Kerry's explanation of how he'll pay for his [health] plan doesn't add up. He's trying to have it both ways."
"I don't think cheap sound bites hiding expensive plans are the answer." – on health-care proposals from Kerry and Dean.
'Waffler'
Comments from Lieberman:
"This is about the votes [on Iraq] that he's cast that I believe are inconsistent."
"We also don't need a waffler in charge of our country's future."
"I do think that Senator Kerry was sounding an uncertain trumpet about that particular battle." – on the Iraq war resolution.
By historical standards, this year's Democrat primary was a relatively tame affair, absent some of the harsher rhetoric of campaigns past. And presidential historian Henry Graff said voters were so used to the ritual they would not take the negative words too seriously. In the words of Democrat consultant Paul Begala, "So what?"
Even so, the list of attack lines goes on and on. And you can bet the Republicans are keeping track.
Political analysts caution there are risks to reviving such rhetoric in the fall campaign, particularly this year.
"The problem with the Republicans using it is that the Democrats agreed in every debate that anyone on the stage was better than George Bush," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson of Annenberg Public Policy Center. Any time the Democrats' critical words are revived, the author of the words can step forward to explain them away and speak in praise of Kerry.
Still, Rich Bond, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, said the Democrats "can't erase the record, and they said some awful things."
For the Republicans, he said, "it is certainly worth reviewing and using their words against John Kerry against John Kerry."
Well, before he sticks it in the wind, and before he licks it, he must first pull it out of his ....
So was Custer...
Kerry: Federal government should recognize state-sanctioned same-sex 'marriage' Mar 4, 2004 By Staff BOSTON (BP)--Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has told homosexual activists that the federal government should recognize same-sex “marriages” and civil unions that are legalized on the state level, The Washington Post reported March 4.
His position means that the federal government would grant the same 1,000-plus benefits enjoyed by married couples nationwide to same-sex couples -- provided that those couples lives in a state that allows for same-sex “marriage” or civil unions.
Kerry made the pledge at a homosexual fundraiser in San Francisco Feb. 27, the newspaper reported, adding that it is the furthest Kerry has gone in defining his position on same-sex “marriage.”
“[H]e would bestow all federal benefits such as the right to file joint income taxes and collect survivor benefits to same-sex couples who unite legally in civil unions, domestic partnerships and even marriage under their state laws,” The Post reported.
Kerry, who says he personally opposes same-sex “marriage,” has been criticized by homosexual activists for supporting a marriage amendment to the Massachusetts constitution that would ban same-sex “marriage” while legalizing civil unions.
He opposes a federal marriage amendment and was one of only 14 senators in 1996 to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act.
Kerry’s comments at the fundraiser were meant to appease homosexual activists, The Post said.
Kerry is trying to find “middle ground” on same-sex “marriage,” his advisers told the newspaper.
"There were a lot of people who were very upset at the way his position was described," Jeff Soukup, a Kerry supporter who is a homosexual, told The Post. “And there were a lot of people who had been planning to attend the fundraiser who said they would not attend until Kerry clarified his position."
California state Rep. Mark Leno, who has introduced a bill in California that would legalize same-sex “marriage,” was pleased with Kerry’s position.
“It’s the first time in history that a presidential candidate has ever supported full and equal protection for same-sex couples," Leno told the newspaper. “He told me that he would grant all 1,049 federal rights to same-sex couples in whatever legal union their states recognize.”
President Bush backed a constitutional marriage amendment Feb. 24, saying it may be the only way to stop nationalized same-sex “marriage.”
“An amendment to the Constitution is never to be undertaken lightly,” Bush said at the time. “The amendment process has addressed many serious matters of national concern. And the preservation of marriage rises to this level of national importance.”
For more information on the debate over same-sex "marriage," visit BP's story collection at: http://www.bpnews.net/samesexmarriage
A Democratic politician incensed by hypocrisy?
Now THAT'S one for the book of the most hypocritical people known to man!
Now, now, let's be nice. C'mon, a guy makes one mistake and people jump all over him forever.
(just kidding)
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.
