Wis. Man to Kerry: "It's killing you in this area"

"The criticism of Bush is reaching the heartland towns that Kerry has visited. In Shullsburg, Wis., Kerry's bus stopped so he could greet some well-wishers along the road, and a man asked Kerry about his vote against funding body armor for U.S. troops. Kerry says that's a distortion of his record.


'It's killing you in this area,' the man said.

Kerry voted against an $87 billion package for Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) that included money for thousands of extra sets of body armor. But Kerry has said he voted against the bill because he did not support the president's military and reconstruction plans, and wanted to roll back a tax cut for high-income taxpayers to finance the war.

Kerry moved on to shake more hands, but turned back. He told the man, 'I'd never leave those troops without their body armor, you know that.'"

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040804/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_map_6&printer=1

I can only think that Kerry is waiting for the debates to smack down this lamest of all their lame talking points. That could be a real gotcha moment during the debates...

But as this article shows - this meme has gotten traction simply by virtue of massive repitition. I really, really want this talking point smashed - it is such a distortion and such a phony issue.

I just hope it's not too late by the time he DOES address this issue.

If Kerry loses, this is one of the things I'll look back on and point at. Once something gets imbedded into the mind of a voter, it requires more than a clever answer at a debate to dislodge it, and that's assuming that the voter is watching the debates.

The longer warped accusations like this last, the more it will hurt him - and if a voter really feels that way, a simple "you know I'd never..." to that voter probably won't be enough. The answer has to be swift, detailed and nationwide, or it will cost us dearly.

This is a huge problem. To Kerry's staff: if you're reading this, get your boss to address this now unless you want four more years of hell.

the vote was taken?

After all, they'd already been in batlle for a few months by then.

Why would that vote have determined whether or not they received their standard issue body armor?

Clinton.

If they weren't properly equipped, why were they sent into war? After all, it wasn't as if there was an immediate threat to our country! :mad:

That is what Kerry needs to debate Bush over.

Why did he send the troops over to Iraq without body amour.

if Kerry waits, the memes will have taken hold and be nearly impossible to dislodge

Kerry and his advisors must never forget that the TV media and the RW radio shows are attacking him and lying about him and.... 24/7

'we had to vote 2 times because GEORGE BUSH threatened to veto the bill if we had to actually PAY for the flack jackets for our troops'

and that he has always supported body armor and supplies for the troops. The money went to body armor for Halliburton employees only.

the last thing you want to do in a damage control type of situation in a presidential campaign of this magnitude it start making things up!

is under investigation for illegal exports by the dept of homeland security. They are not talking about it.

The "Illegal exports" were most likely the BODY ARMOR purchased by friends and family for soldiers in Iraq.

TearForger

They have video of Kerry saying on Face the Nation that it would irresponsible and reckless to vote against the measure.

They have the fact that even though Biden sponsored the failed ammendment that would have rolled back tax cuts, he supported the final one.

This has been one of Kerry's few major faux pas in his campaign. He did this to keep up with the Dean people and its going to haunt him for the rest of his campaign. It was stupid, anyway you look at it. This has turned into a major plank of the Republican attack machine that they didn't need to have.

This must be like rule number 1 in a presidential campaign, never vote against troops in combat, even if you have complicated answer, you're not dealing with a complicated electorate.

1. Kerry voted for fiscal responsibility - everyone knew this was just a down payment (in fact, polls at the time showed that a majority agreed with Kerry's vote!). He wanted to roll back some, not all, just some of the tax cuts for the rich and make part of the bill a loan to Iraq.

2. The bill was laden with handouts to *'s corporate pals - YOU DON'T GIVE OUT CORPORATE HAND OUTS ON THE BACKS OF AMERICAN TROOPS! Kerry wanted accountablility - remember most of the $87 billion was for reconstruction - and we've now found out much of it was wasted. Kerry was right to deman accountability as Biden himself has admitted.

3. Bush threatened to Veto the bill if it didn't arrive exactly the way he wanted it. He threatened to do the same thing Kerry did.

So if that does sounds complicated here's the soundbites - He voted for fiscal responsibility which the American people wanted, you don't give out corporate goodies on the backs of the American military, and * said he'd had done the same thing if he didn't get those corporate handouts....

responsibility.

All they need to respond with is, "If 51 senators agreed with Kerry our troops would be stuck in Iraq with no body armor, no ammunition...blah blah blah"

Bush threatening to veto is probably to most effective argument to counteract, but the fact is that he never had to make that decision.

But they still got that tape of him saying it would be irresponsible and reckless, and couple that with "I voted for before I voted against" and you have a pretty damning October ad spree.

If he didn't make this dumb decision, they would have lost a huge plank in their smear against Kerry.

with Kerry's vote...

It was a vote of PRINCIPLE - that's how you frame it. And then you work in the corporate corruption and the missing money within that frame. That's how Kerry comes out smelling like a rose on this vote. Everyone knew it was just a downpayment, and everyone now is learning about the missing funds.

And their potential response that you touted is total BS - that's not how it works. The troops get the body armor and ammo NO MATTER WHAT - the bill was about how to fund it.

Because this is one of the few issues of this campaign that concerns me.

The Kerry people really need to start responding in the manner you outlined, and fast.

The concept can be REPOSITIONED as his voting AGAINST "Another Halliburton Hand-out."

And how about this for a new MEME: turn the "tax relief" baloney from the wrong-wing into "tax GIVEAWAYS."

You defend yourself AND throw it back on them as an attack....

I think your memes are good. They reframe the issue as a return attack. That's what the dems need to start doing.

Obviously the campaign hasn't gotten the message through.

I think they are trying to be too cute with their responses.

They NEED to DIRECTLY address this now in SIMPLE terms. Unfortunately, by waiting until now, Kerry can't respond himself since he's now limited by a cash crunch until September.

Oy.

We all know the DNC won't be of any real help.

and then he needed congress' approval to purchase more?
and somehow John Kerry was responsible?
guess again.

I started this thread Sunday, immediately upon seeing him REFUSE to answer this very question, put to him by Stephie, for which refusal he was RIDICULED by the panel; indeed, called Dukakissian

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2129788

lots of disagreement here--all wrong, of course, and quite nasty, too

when are people, as in KERRY people, going to WISE the FFFFF up?????

C'mon. This is important and it's so easy to deal with. People do your jobs! This is the kind of thing you need to nip in the bud immediately before it takes on a life of its own. basics.

that's the truth.

He took the worst of both worlds. Voting for the war and voting against funding it.

I can forgive him for the first, for the second vote, I just think it was laziness on his part - wanting to appeal to the Dean supporters.

not defending it, but he WAS way down in the toilet for quite awhile, right?

he may have HAD to sacrifice principles in service of the immediate need

he really really really screwed up by not answering this, and the other flipflop charges right away, like Clinton did

it may be too late for those who've seen the constant bombardment of ads (what sort of LOW GRADE MORON WATCHES that crap, anyway? don't they have remote controls in schwing schtates?).

I hope that it's a small enough demographic that it won't make the difference

GET OUT of THE RACE, Ralph!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Republicans want him to start defending his votes in the senate. The game plan is if he will defend one vote they have him where he will be defending every vote. I they can get the campaign to defend one then they will keep it going so the emphasis is off Bush and on Kerry's votes.

Many of the Senate votes are similar to the 87B; first the house, then the Senate, then to committee for amendments and compromise then back to the Senate. They are frequently voted down the second time because of the amendments attached.

Of course, if Americans had paid attention in government class in high school (is it even taught there anymore?) or college, then they might have a better grasp of how it works.

Kerry might just be smart to not address his voting record. I think that is why Senators rarely win the presidency.

Someone has to get TV and print ads out to the target states clearly explaining the distortion of the Bush claims.

-1. Originally voted for the IWR because based on the selective intell passed on to the senate by the WH, regarding Iran and Saddam Hussein, it was the right decision to make.

-2. When the bill came up for a vote on the $87b budget we asked for the tax cut on the wealthiest taxpayers to be rolled back to pay for the $87b expense. The bill contained $20b for our soldiers and $67b for public contractors such as Halliburton.

-3. The President threatened to VETO that bill if the tax cut was included denying our troops essential equipment in order to protect the tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers. Protecting their needs ahead of the troops.

-4. There were enough votes in the senate to pass the bill which excluded the roll back of the tax cut without John Kerry's vote. Based on the principle that we should not spend money we did not have, and that the Bush administration would not roll back the tax cut to the wealthiest taxpayers, John Kerry took a stand not to vote for the bill. Had there been any question about the bill passing John Kerry would have voted for it to ensure our soldiers received the equipment they needed.


Not sure I have all the facts straight, please correct me where I am wrong. I know most people only listen to sound bites so maybe this needs to be more succinct. But this has NOT been clearly articulated to the American public. It needs to be.....forcefully.

He shouldn't be defensive......that's obviously what they want. He has to reframe this issue in language that is easily understood. Too many words will not do the job....they need a short and to-the-point attack of their own. Condensing this bill to only body armor was yet another Repub coup.

had no reason to go to war in Iraq in the first place. Duh!

I was in Iraq, the $87 billion was allocated. We didn't get no fucking body armor!!!!!! Bush is lying dog!
:grr: :grr: :grr:

Do you have anyone else that served with you that could confirm the story for the media?

not one of us were issued body armor in Iraq during 2003. We were a National Guard Transportation Co. traveling the roads everyday, and we were never issued any. We wore the old Gulf War Flak vests through our entire deployment. The body armor was starting to get into the supply system when we pulled out in Dec 03.

Thanks for being a truth-teller. Thanks for your service both now and then. You and your story are sooooo important to our nation. Thank you for the burden that you carry. Here's a big hug from Houston: :hug:

Tell them what you told us.

Perhaps they'd listen and respond to these GOP charges more forcefully.

What a lying sack! I can't believe that. Actually, yes, I can believe it.

I'm glad you got back OK, anyhow, toiletbush.

about armor for our people in Iraq!

No armor before allocation... No armor after allocation... So, exactly what is the issue again?

too many words. Remember.... you are trying to get to an audience that reads on the 7th grade level and some who are to busy to read too many words.

sound bytes. That's one reason I believe Kerry hasn't tried to reduce this to a one sentence answer-because it IS more complex. For me, keeps the points that A. this was 2 bills B. Bush also threatened to veto the bills C. the majority country against the 87 billion D only a tiny part for the military D. Even some Repubs thought the 2nd bill stunk till they were strong-armed into passing it and E. Bush is lying about Kerry and caught on film.

No reason to limit your audience unnecessarily...

but who's going to watch something this long?

that's the advantage these creeps have with their soundbite propanda/PR strategy: they make brief, pithy-sounding, menDACIOUS charges, that take a long time to refute

couple of things:

I like the idea of that clip of Dumbo lying up near the front

those slides fade a little too fast...I put em on pause....I'm not that slow a reader, and there are many factoids to digest

last....you used the word tantamount instead of paramount towards the end

it's good, though; keeps the mind occupied

some music in background?

He is going down the same path that Gore did on 2000.

If I remember correctly, in '92 Carville was very aggressive about answering all GOP bullshit and then countering with a valid criticism that the GOP had to defend.

This charge cannot go unanswered.

Kerry needs to keep hammering home the fact that Bush sent our troops into battle unprepared. Bush was planning this invasion for over a year. Why did he not make sure they had the proper equipment.

conference to clear this up? He would have to be extremely well prepared for this, but it would give him a forum.

dunno how it works in the strictures of a campaign swing, since the reporters are there all the time

at very least, he needs to gather all the 'boys on the bus' together and hammer that point home. the PROBLEM is that he very clearly REFUSED to admit the need to even ADDRESS this question on Sunday. I saw him say that, and started a thread on it.

he needs to get out in front of this SOONEST

That should tell us something.

else and the troops STILL didn't get any GD body armor!!

SHOVE IT Bushco!!

:kick:

Is that Kerry voted against it because part of it called for upwards of $20 billion to be used for 'reconstruction', and bush was insisting that Congress have NO OVERSIGHT over how that $20 billion was spent.

There was nothing WRONG with voting against this package. But Kerry is F***ING UP big time by REFUSING to publically, forcefully address this distortion of the record.

Hell, the guy didn't VOTE FOR THE WAR (unlike what every Repuke caller on the local AM radio show says) and he's still not addressing THAT issue either. These two issues could cost him the election, and he seems to be blind to how much this simple message of 'flip-flopping on the war' is hurting him.

The 'way out' of the 'voting for the RESOLUTION to give the President the POWER to go to War at HIS discretion' is to PLAY UP the 'his discretion' part. Also, REMIND EVERYONE that we were trying to get the inspectors into Iraq at that time, and that he (kerry) used his vote to try to help bush in presenting a UNIFIED US FRONT to Saddam, so that he would be SCARED ENOUGH to let the inspectors back in. He did not want to be cast as one who caused the US to LACK the appearance of unity, have Saddam NOT let the inspectors in because of it, and THEN be accused of having CAUSED us to 'have to' go to war by his vote 'against unity' (which is EXACTLY how the GOP would be playing it now - this whole vote was a NIGHTMARE for Dems - that's EXACTLY why Rove insisted upon it happening right then when he did ... F*CK I hate these manipulative mofo's!!!

Anyways, BOTH of these points are TRUE, to my best knowledge. Kerry has GOT TO REMEDY these misunderstandings PUBLICALLY, LOUDLY, OFTEN...

$$$ released: no armor = * is a liar and it doesn't matter how Kerry voted!

that out of the $87 billion, only 13 million went to the troops and the rest is unaccounted for. Did anyone else hear that? Does anyone know if it's true? :shrug: If so, Kerry should slam Bush with it!

Show us the $$$ *!!! Show us the troops that got armor and those who did not!!! We want an accounting of exactly where that $$$ went since you are calling foul! It's up to those who are saying foul to prove their point!

And while we are at it.. why on earth would DoD send troops into life and death situations w/o armor to begin with, eh?!

I'm so mad ... when Randi said it, someone was in the car with me and they were talking on the phone, so I'm not 100% sure I heard it correctly.

John Kerry Criticizes Bush on 9/11 Response

Unveils Homeland Security Initiatives and Plan to Reimburse Military Families for Body Armor

Democratic candidate for President John Kerry today stood up to the Bush Administration for their response to the terrorist attacks of September 11th and for failing to provide U.S. soldiers in Iraq with the proper protective body armor.

In San Diego today, John Kerry and two of his swift boat crewmates commemorated the sacrifice of those who died in the attack on Pearl Harbor by placing a wreath at the swift boat memorial at the Coronado Naval Amphibious Base where Kerry trained for his service in Vietnam. John Kerry also unveiled details of his plan to improve intelligence gathering, protect U.S. ports, and reimburse military families for body armor purchases.

One-fourth of the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq are still waiting for the latest body armor. In the meantime, family members and friends are paying hundreds of dollars for the updated armor themselves and shipping it to Iraq. On Tuesday Kerry will introduce legislation to reimburse family members who paid money out of their own pockets to provide the personal body armor that the government failed to deliver.

"In the rush to war, this administration failed to adequately outfit military personnel shipping off to Iraq. As a result, many of our fighting men and women do not have the latest technology for body armor. It's a disgrace that their families had to use their own funds to buy the body armor and ship it to Iraq. My legislation will reimburse those families," said John Kerry.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2003_120...

.

Voted against making YOUR CHILDREN pay for it.