Kerry Touts Impressive Senate Record

I think Kerry should lay off the Vietnam thing for awhile, since everyone is going to report it anyway. He should totally start playing up his battles with Ollie North and Reagan's illegal war, his fight against Noriega and drug smuggling, his BCCI investigations, his POW-MIA investigations, his place as head of the Small Business Committee and the Subcommittee on Terrorism.

I think all of these achievements will resonate with Democrats and Americans generally.

--

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry says that serving almost two decades in the Senate has provided him with the ideal experience to serve in the White House in such difficult times because he knows how to get things done in Washington.

Kerry, a Vietnam War veteran and a long-standing member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he has stronger foreign policy experience than any other candidate. He acknowledged retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark would have impressive military credentials if he decides to get in the race.

"He brings obviously some military experience that I don't have and a career in the military," he said. "But he does not bring some of the other things that I have, which are 20 years of experience in the other field and leading in the policy side."

The senator said he would not vote for the president's $87 billion request without some assurance that the president will seek help from other nations.

"I am unwilling to just rubber stamp $87 billion if they're not going to do what they need to do to try to put America in a stronger position," he said. He called for more foreign troops and the use of oil revenues to reimburse the reconstruction cost.

"What happened to the oil revenue that supposedly the president told us was going to pay for the cost?" he said. "Mr. President, where is the oil revenue?"

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&e=16&u=/ap/kerry_interview

What's not impressive about Kerry?

Voted for:
PATRIOT Act
Giving * a big fat blank check to start the Iraq War
Homeland Getsapo Act
Approving WAY too many conservative judges that will be stuck with us for the next 20 years, when he should have called for a block ala Clinton's nominees.

and much more.

I won't count them all, but Kerry has never ignited an interest in me. He has no charisma, and a face of a toad, and the brain of one to boot.
No, this isn't an anti-Kerry thread, but it's the truth.

Hawkeye-X

And that doesn't bode well for this election. He's coming across as simply another Washington insider who hasn't a clue about the real world.

He was my fave for quite some time because I do think he's generally a decent person, and I agree with him most of the time--alas, he's lost me now, and can't win me back! Actually, if he got the nomination (highly unlikely) I'd vote for him of course over the Gestapo Party.

See for yourself.

http://www.johnkerry.com/av/

<>

One thing about a Senate voting record: It's easy to find fault with it because there have been so many voters cast over so many years. But at least we know there are few ghosts in teh closet (especially after Kerry's difficult reelection campaign in '96) and we know where he stands on lots of things. His stances on the environment have always been strong and principled, as have his stances on gay rights and education.
I agree with him on the governor thing. Even Bill Clinton made some serious tactical mistakes his first two years that cost us the House and Senate. I think Kerry would not make those mistakes by virtue of the fact that as a former Senator he would be know better how to work with Congress and would have friends their who could help him get legislation through.

Water to put out the fires Bush has set all over the world. I am sick to death of 'fired up' candidates who haven't got a clue how to fix the problems of the world or work with Congress to get anything done.

Kerry has enormous fire, but he is very controlled as well. You simply have to read the story of his heroism in Vietnam to know this guy has a savage side that almost never comes to the surface in the political arena - as it shouldn't. He's not a political theatre guy, for sure, but I'm not clear that this quality is useful once someone makes it to the oval office.

I don't know about you, but I very definitely want a Washington insider as President in 2005. We've had two "outsiders" as President since 1993, and I can't say that either has left the world a safer place. This is definitely not the time IMHO for on-the-job training for a President. This nation, and our world, is in deep trouble. IMHO, we need experience, vision and real leadership skills.

Kerry has one of the best records of rejecting Bush appointees, including Gale Norton and John Ashcroft. Name one Bush judge that other Dems rejected that Kerry approved.

"As lifetime appointees, judicial nominees will shape fundamental issues such as civil rights, religious freedom, privacy rights and freedom of speech for decades to come.

Conservative judges bent on enforcing ideology rather than interpreting the law have recently undermined landmark achievements such as the Violence Against Women Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

John Kerry believes that individuals appointed to all of our federal courts must be committed to interpreting the law and preserving constitutional and civil rights."

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/civilrights.html

"I am prepared to filibuster, if necessary, any Supreme Court nominee who would turn back the clock on a woman’s right to choose, on civil rights and individual liberties, and on the laws protecting workers and the environment.

...

The criteria are basic: Any person who thinks it’s his or her job to push an extreme political agenda, rather than to interpret the law, should not be a Supreme Court Justice. Any person who thinks it’s his or her job to carry out the President’s political agenda, rather than to provide justice to ordinary Americans, should not be a Supreme Court Justice."

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/003516.html

As for the Patriot Act, we've been down this road. It was rushed through one month after 9/11, and even die-hard progressives like Wellstone voted for it.

Thomas and against Ashcroft as Atty. Gen. He helped filibuster Estrada from the get go. Do you care to tell us who Kerry voted for that leaves you with that false impression?

The blank check Bush wanted for the war was horrific. Kerry helped curtail it along with other lawmakers who bothered to negotiate for the better deal.

Why deign to use one's physical characteristics to bash another Dem gratuitously? It's just not good character.

The blank check Bush wanted for the war was horrific. Kerry helped curtail it along with other lawmakers who bothered to negotiate for the better deal.

I'll grant you that restricting the scope of a war that Bush lied about from the Entire Middle East to just Iraq is a better deal, but it's like getting five years off from Purgatory. If you still have ten thousand to go, then five years isn't much.

If Kerry didn't know that he was giving Bush full authority to go to war with Iraq, then he wasn't paying attention and for that reason doesn't deserve the job of President.

If Kerry *did* know that he was giving Bush full authority to go to war, then he shouldn't claim otherwise in his speeches.

I can't understand what people don't get about those two words. Of course Kerry knew he was giving Bush the authority to go to war, but like he says, Bush really didn't need Congressional authority anyway.

So Congress goes to Bush, negotiates a deal in good faith, Bush will work with the UN, work with the inspection process, all of that. Bush agrees. Then Congress is just supposed to turn its back on that and vote no? What happens the next time negotiations need to be made?

The Authorization was to enforce UN resolutions to disarm Saddam Hussein. People say let the inspections process continue, as if there would have been inspectors without the threat of force. Sanctions were working, never mind the suffering to the Iraqi people and criticisms related to that. As well as the fact that without any sanctions, Saddam would most likely have continued his weapons programs, even Scott Ritter said that. Containment was working, the wonderful no-fly zones, never mind the criticisms related to that either. And now, the United States even gets blamed for them because they caused the infrastructure disarray in the north and south. Some people are just not rational when it comes to Iraq, they fail to consider all the factors leading to the Authorization.

With a reasoned President, the Authorization would have been a positive development. Unfortunately, Bush has no more respect for Congress than he does any other institution around the world. It would sure be nice if people would put the blame where it lies, squarely on Bush's head.

That evidence that Bush was forced to present to Congress and the UN caused him to overreach, and now Bush's credibility is shot because of that overreaching. His credibility with the American people is what will cause him to lose in 2004 and the GOP will go down with him.

"Voted to threaten." It was a short-hand term for voting to give President Bush the authority to declare war, thus helping to convince Saddam Hussein that the armada in his backyard was just law furniture. Saddam screwed around with UNSCOM for years, and Kerry believed that after 9/11 Saddam could not be allowed to do the same with UNMOVIC (which went on the ground a month AFTER the vote).

Dean would explode if his words got the same kind of hyper-scrutiny.

I'm a Dean fan myself, and certainly not a big fan of Kerry. But, I think your ad-hominem attack on the Senator is out of line -- particularly if you're doing it in support of another candidate.

If Dean had stood up and said he opposed the war, fine. He didn't. Instead he got a deferment for a bad back and then went skiing, something Rove must know by now. Do Ho-Ho's supporters know? From Slate:

A troubling tale from his past. Is it true?

By William Saletan and Ben Jacobs
Posted Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 8:15 AM PT

EXCERPT

...Charge: In 1971, Dean, who had been a wrestling team captain in high school, received a draft deferment for an unfused vertebra in his back. In the Aug. 15, 2002, Aspen Times, Dean said he "skied 80 days" in Aspen during the winter of 1971-72. The Times reported that Dean "loved skiing bumps," otherwise known as moguls. (Some health publications note that moguls can put particular stress on the spine.) "It was a great time to be a kid and do something relatively fun," Dean recalled. He added that he also worked that year "pouring concrete." Time reported on Aug. 11, 2003, that Dean spent the year "skiing and bumming around. … He hit the slopes, tried pot, washed dishes, poured concrete and drank impressive amounts of beer." On June 22, 2003, Tim Russert asked Dean on Meet the Press, "Why were you able to ski on Ajax Mountain, pounding your back, and pouring concrete, and not serve in the military?"

Defense: Dean told Russert, "I was given an examination. I had a previous back problem, which is evidently congenital, which prevented me from doing any sustained running, a problem that I've had since then, since that time, which requires that when I get out of the car I often have some pains up and down my leg and back and so forth. But I have been able to exercise a vigorous athletic life except for some things. One of those is long-distance running, which is how the problem came to my attention in the first place. I noticed the pain when I was in high school running track. … After the physical, I received a 1-Y deferment, means you can only be called in times of national emergency. I didn't have anything to do with choosing any draft deferment. … The United States government said this is your classification. I'm not responsible for that."

In the May 25, 2003, Washington Post, Dean's campaign manager, Joe Trippi, said, " view is, 'Look, I went in, got a physical and was rejected, and then I went on with my life.' "

http://slate.msn.com/id/2087543/

It is this kind of courage that has sent him to the head of the pack. Defying traditional assessments he WILL, bad back and all, lead this nation.

Dean '04...Downhill all the way....

P.S. Perhaps the beer hid the pain?

Disdain, sarcasm and humor, with a dash of bon hommie.

The epitome of a non-issue.

.

As a reflection on Dean's character, it should be a non-issue. The only way it becomes an issue is if he is if he is too defensive about it at some critical time, or if facts make him seem like an evader. I don't think they will, and its mostly in his control.

I think it could be, actually I think it is an issue of importance to small unknowned sized portion of this country's electorate that wants to see someone who has been in the military at the helm. I think that is probably because 1) democrats, independents, and even some republicans are sick of a bunch of guys with no understanding of being a soldier starting wars willy-nilly, 2) a lot of current soldiers are disallusioned with their jobs because of such long deployments, (and will like someone who has been a soldier to represent them), and 3) vets like vets.

The size of this audience is unknown to me, but given that Kerry and Clark combine in national polls, it seems to be losely in the neighbhorhood of 30% of the democratic electorate -- lots of that support is definately because of the above issues..

that he voted on the Patriot Act and the IWR which were all part of an incredibly well-thought out and acts of bravery. Except for when he parroted Bush's con-game about his tax shifts. Except for when he didn't stand up for democracy and told us all to go and "cry in our teacups" and "quit whining? about the 2000 election".

Kerry's campaign is brilliant! Noone knows his positions on anything but we all know his resume. What will he do once in office? That's anybodys guess. We should all trust Kerry to do... something... once in office.

MAD policy in effect.

Just like Dean's is his position. Dean spent 12 years compromising, Kerry spent 20 years leading. And you can harp on the Patriot Act & IWR all you want, the fact is most Americans support both of them. So go ahead and elect a compromiser who isn't truly in tune with America and who has taken both sides of every single issue facing us today. Oh, and whose Vermont Health Plan is in serious financial trouble. $100 million dollars in debt within 5 years. Great, no tax cuts and a health care plan that's already a boondoggle. Sure, people are really going to vote for that.

*yawn*

Bring it on. More Destruction, Mutually Assured style. Kerry has enough on him that I could talk a line of facts about him for hours, which I've chosen not to do until a few Kerry zealots finally broke my will to not do it.

Kerry failed to put Oliver North in prison. None of Kerry's investigations brought down Reagan or Bush. A Democratic Massachusetts governor hasn't been elected since the Gov. Michael Dukakis/Lt. Gov. John Kerry ticket. Maybe Kerry should get his own house in order before seeking the presidency?

Let's talk about Dukakis. Because I think Kerry is a whole lot like him. And so does Norquist:
''For crying out loud, I am from Massachusetts, and I had completely forgotten about Dukakis, I had forgotten how Dukakis plays into a Kerry race,'' said Grover Norquist, a leading Republican activist and president of Americans for Tax Reform. ''We need to go back and pull all the Dukakis files and remind people where Kerry comes from, or the only part of his history will be that he served in Vietnam and was in the Senate. We need to remind people of his Massachusetts liberal days.''
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/324/nation/Dukakis_has_advice_to_share_with_Kerry%20.shtml

And speaking of deficits. Kerry IS, RIGHT NOW a U.S. senator and our NATION is running a deficit much bigger than $100 Million.

This is who you are quoting? I'm sure he is just trying to help us get a Democrat elected.

It's true, Kerry is a liberal, he's always been a liberal, and he always will be a liberal. If you think that is a negative, you may be in the wrong party.

in the general election.

I'll leave it at that since my goal is to show the Kerry zealot negative attackers that Kerry isn't perfect.

A candidate with clear distinctions from Republicans. What we all want.

Bush's tax shifts to the wealthy by making it look like they cut taxes a great amount for the middle class.

"defending Bush's tax shifts to the wealthy"

Let us know when you are ready to discuss Kerry's real positions and record.

John Kerry's Plan to Fight for America's Economic Future
August 28, 2003

George W. Bush's policies are destroying America's economic security. Our nation has gone from financial stability to record deficits; from creating 23 million new jobs to losing over 3 million jobs. Corporate scandals - some led by Bush's closest corporate cronies –have wiped out personal savings and shaken investor confidence. And American families are finding they must work harder and harder just to keep up.

George W. Bush has supported tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and corporations with the false promise that some of that money might one day trickle down to middle class families and bolster our economy – but the Bush policies are a proven failure. John Kerry’s priority will be middle class families working hard to cover the mortgage, pay the high cost of health care, child care and tuition, or just trying to get ahead. It’s time that the nation’s economic policy put the American worker and American entrepreneur first.

<snip>

JOHN KERRY’S PLAN WILL:

(1) Jumpstart Jobs with a new “State Tax Relief and Education Fund” and a New Manufacturing Tax Credit.

(2) Using American Ingenuity to Invest in the Industries of the Future.

(3) A New College Opportunity Tax Cut to Assure Americans Can Afford Four Years of College.

(4) Provide Tax Relief for Middle Class Families Trying to Make Ends Meet and End Unfair Relief for Corporate America.

(5) Bring Financial Discipline to Washington.

More Details: http://www.johnkerry.com/news/releases/pr_2003_0828.html

He isn't saying they cut taxes a great amount for the middle class. He's saying he's not going to take away the little bit that the middle class got. That's PROGRESSIVE TAX POLICY!!!!!! The same goddamn thing everybody on this board always wants. Less taxes for low and middle income, higher taxes for the wealthy.

His investigation of Iran/Contra was huge, no matter how you try to belittle it. But it's never been the reason I support him. It's his record. Women's rights, education, health care, veterans, housing, small business, unions, the environment. That's what I'm basing my vote on. And he's not a Massachusetts liberal, he's a social liberal with a keen eye on fiscal responsiblity. Cutting unnecessary programs, corporate welfare, and military spending like star wars and nuclear weapons. He voted against every Bush tax cut, the deficit isn't his fault. And he's no Michael Dukakis, that's for damn sure.

(Funny how you're using Republican talking points when Deanie's always accuse everybody else of doing that.)

And I'm honestly not convenced he won't turn out exactly like Michael Dukakis. Heck, they could save their money on ad productions and just run their attack ads on Dukakis, again.

I'm going to ramp up my attacks as Dean bashers ramp up your attacks, so keep your negative attacks on Dean if you'd like me to do some real digging and negative attacks on Kerry, sandnsea.

OK. lol

You haven't come up with anything yet.

The reason why Kerry couldn't pound Oliver North down to a pulp was because his rightfully fervent pursuit was deemed too aggressive by his Democratic peers, and they took him off. I believe they gave him a seat on the Subcommittee on Terrorism, or something like that. Oh, it's now his fault for not stomping out in protest? And it didn't help that Reagan's VP, Bush, succeeded him and pardoned Oliver North and the gang. Kerry didn't bring down Reagan? Because of Kerry's brave investigation, Reagan's legitimate achievements as president, beyond massive popularity, is quite shot. Did you expect the good old county sheriff to drag the outlaw into prison or something?

Dukakis was shot down because he was seen as too wussy. Kerry has no fear of being labelled that. If you question his battle experience, just ask him what happened to his six best friends in Vietnam. That's right, they're dead, may they rest in peace.

Kerry has a ton of charisma and is a much superior orator than Dean. Dean is just tapping into the "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it" impulse. It's the oldest trick in politics - but it clearly still plays with the adrenlin-rush crowd.

John Kerry has, by far, the best skill-set to serve as President in 2005, and the best skill-set to actually win the Presidency in a general election. He is the best candidate the Democrats have presented in 20 years.

That's not counting the 16 years before that of military service, service as a Massachusetts state prosecutor, and service as a Lt. Governor. In all that time, Kerry put the interests of the United States, its Constitution, and "We the People" ahead of his own. No one has John Kerry's combination of experience in government, leadership qualities, and the strength of character needed to serve as President of the United States.