White House sets attack dogs on Kerry

[T_i_B]

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=486622

For six of the seven Democratic hopefuls vying for the nomination to take on George Bush in November there is only one game in town: trying to stop the seventh - John Kerry.

Further proof of Mr Kerry's surge was provided by the very people he is seeking to challenge in November. Ken Mehlman, Mr Bush's campaign manager, accused the Massachusetts Senator and Vietnam veteran of being weak on national security. "We value Senator Kerry's honourable and heroic service in Vietnam. But we question his judgement in consistently voting to cut defence and intelligence funding critical to national security," said Mr Mehlman, one of two senior Republicans to attack the Democratic front-runner.

" he sought to cancel the very weapons systems that are winning the war on terror and maintaining our military strength. He opposed Ronald Reagan's efforts to fight communism in our hemisphere and opposed the first Gulf War." The White House considers the experienced Mr Kerry a much tougher opponent than Mr Dean, and a poll in Newsweek suggested that in a head-to-head with the President, Mr Kerry could win by three points

In an indication of the concern among administration officials, Mr Bush's campaign chief told party members: "We must expect an election where we will be behind at certain points, particularly after the Democrats settle on their nominee and hold their convention. This will not be easy. The country remains closely divided." Mr Kerry later said the Republicans were "scared stiff" of him. "That is why they are sending their attack dogs out," he said. "I am going to fight back. It isn't going to work."

[jpgpenn]

1. Let them try this with Clark!

It would never fly!!!!!

Clark in 2004!

[displacedtexan]

2. Would you vote for more military $ after the collapse of the Soviet Union?

Repukes did. In fact, they wanted to waste the entire peace dividend on military spending.

"But we question his judgment in consistently voting to cut defense and intelligence funding critical to national security," said Mr Mehlman, one of two senior Republicans to attack the Democratic front-runner."

Like omitting the 1988 date when claiming Saddam gassed his own people, repukes are now attacking Kerry for favoring domestic spending during the early '90's.

To Dean supporters: Is it so important to slime Kerry that you promote false repuke accusations against a Democrat?

[T_i_B]

3. I'm not a Dean supporter

I'm undecided between Dean & CLark with Kerry my third choice for the, ahem all important Thankfully_in_Britain endorsement. Since articles about Kerry keep popping up in the UK press I keep posting them. It's as simple as that.

Where are the false repuke accusations against Kerry in the article from Dean supporters? The allegations against Kerry I see in the article are direct from the RNC.

[BeatleBoot]

4. Bring It On

:mad: