Kerry wants to shut down the nuclear bunker-buster program (small nukes that can burrow through rock and concrete before exploding).
Well now. Such weapons would be used only after a nuclear attack on the US. They are meant to deter by telling Kim Jong Il and the Iranian mullahs that they can't shoot and then hide -- they WILL be incinerated in their bunkers.
What's hard to understand about that? Kerry fantasizes that somehow it's fair play for us to give up our nuclear dominance in order to keep rogue nations from developing such weapons. Well, DUH. Those nations don't understand "fair play" as Kerry learned it at St. Paul's prep school.
We also should not forget that Kerry was a cheerleader for the Soviet-backed unilateral Nuclear Freeze in the 1980s -- back when the Soviet Union was a real threat, with more nuclear weapons in their inventory than the US had. Bush missed a great opportunity in failing to point this out.
Do a Google on Kerry and "nuclear freeze" -- is this the sort of judgment we want in the Oval Office? The answer is in the question itself.