Slate defends Kerry voting record against "flip-Flop charge"John Kerry's D

[papau]

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/

John Kerry's Defense Defense
Setting his voting record straight.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004, at 3:41 PM PT

Against defense? Not Kerry

Before George W. Bush's political operatives started pounding on John Kerry for voting against certain weapons systems during his years in the Senate, they should have taken a look at this quotation:

After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles. … The reductions I have approved will save us an additional $50 billion over the next five years. By 1997 we will have cut defense by 30 percent since I took office.

The speaker was President George H.W. Bush, the current president's father, in his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, 1992.

They should also have looked up some testimony by Dick Cheney, the first President Bush's secretary of defense (and now vice president), three days later, boasting of similar slashings before the Senate Armed Services Committee:

Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. … And now we're adding to that another $50 billion … of so-called peace dividend.

Cheney proceeded to lay into the then-Democratically controlled Congress for refusing to cut more weapons systems.

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. … You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s—all great systems … but we have enough of them.

The Republican operatives might also have noticed Gen. Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the same hearings, testifying about plans to cut Army divisions by one-third, Navy aircraft carriers by one-fifth, and active armed forces by half a million men and women, to say noting of "major reductions" in fighter wings and strategic bombers.

Granted, these reductions were made in the wake of the Soviet Union's dissolution and the Cold War's demise. But that's just the point: Proposed cuts must be examined in context. A vote against a particular weapons system doesn't necessarily indicate indifference toward national defense.<snip>

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[MsUnderstood]

2. Question about John Kerry

Does John Kerry support the Mass constitutional amendment to make marriage between a man and a woman?

I have heard a news blurb on the radio but cannot find support.

I want to vote for Kerry but certainly don't want to support discrimination.

[emulatorloo]

3. He is against "gay marriage" but is for full rights under civil unions

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/glbt/

<snip>

John Kerry supports same-sex civil unions so that gay couples can benefit from the health benefits, inheritance rights, or Social Security survivor benefits guaranteed for heterosexual couples.

John Kerry believes that same-sex couples should be granted rights, including access to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections that all families and children need.  He has supported legislation to provide domestic partners of federal employees the benefits available to spouses of federal employees.  He was one of 14 Senators -- and the only one up for reelection in 1996 -- to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

<snip>

[MsUnderstood]

5. Okay now I am mad!

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/02/26/kerry_backs_state_ban_on_gay_marriage/

John Kerry may have voted against DOMA, but what the heck is he doing now?

Gay marriage is STATE RIGHT and a CIVIL RIGHT. As the presidential candidate he should stay out of the debate or stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians.

*stomping over to the edwards camp*

[emulatorloo]

7. Um, Edwards position is more or less the same. . . .

He (JK) is standing up for Civil Unions. . .

GWB is the enemy on this issue, not JK or JE

It is going to be a hop skip and a jump from civil unions to gay marriage (because it is mostly a semantic distinction anyway)

GWBs position is ban of civil unions too.

[sangha]

8. disruptive hijack

There are plenty of thread's on Kerry position concerning gay marriage and civil unions.

[emulatorloo]

9. I make the mistake of thinking "honest questions" are honest questions

sometimes, in spite of my vow not to fall for those traps. Have done so twice today! DOH!

[MsUnderstood]

10. Kerry is not standing up for civil rights

Look, I really beleive that Edwards and Kerry are the "same" people--they have pretty close idealogies on many of the issues. . .maybe because they are trying to appeal to the largest number of voters, but I digress. . .

The point is that when both come out and say "The Federal Amendment is wrong" I cheer. When one comes out and says "The Federal Amendment is wrong" but goes against his party in his own state to say "I think a state amendment barring gays from 'marriage' is okay!" then that tells me if given the chance to represent me federally, I should be afraid.

Yes, Edwards has the same opinion "gay marriage bad, civil unions good" but he is lucky enough not to have to face the issue. Kerry faced the issue and spat on civil rights.

And I know this shouldn't be all about gay marriage but when 2 candidates are so close on everything (and voting is 4 days away) then I am going to look at the finer points.

[littlejoe]

4. Good piece. I already knew it, but it's important for Kerry

detractors to see this.

[Viking12]

6. Here's a simple explanation

Here's a simple explanation of Congressional voting that can help you dispell Repug rhetoric, make democrats, and influence voters. From: http://counterspin.blogspot.com/

I explained this before, but here's how it works just in case you missed it.

Let's say there was a bill before the Senate called the "Herd all mothers and small children into concentration camps" bill. Obviously, it's a terrible bill, and no one in their right mind would vote in favor of it.

But, let's suppose, that one of the sponsors manages to slip a small provision into the bill that amounted to a resolution stating that the "United States is the greatest country in the history of the world."

Now, let's assume that a certain Senator votes against the total bill because it's, on the whole, a terrible bill.

His opponent in the next election can then claim that this Senator voted against a provision declaring that the "United States is the greatest country in the history of the world." What they won't tell you is that it was embedded in the "Herd all mothers and small children into concentration camps" bill, and that's what Senator X voted against.

Politicians do this all the time. They deliberately attach popular provisions to horrible, or unpalatable bills in order to give opposing legislators a hobson's choice: Either vote in favor of a bill they can't stand to avoid getting attacked for voting down some popular provision, or get attacked for voting down some popular provision.

On edit: fixed link

[Moderator]

11. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

...

7. Discussion topics about the Democratic presidential primary are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum. Passing references to the Democratic primary candidates are permitted, provided that the overall topic of discussion is not directly related to the presidential primary or the primary candidates.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator