Posted on 03/07/2004 11:17:12 AM PST by Kuksool
Within hours of John F. Kerry's last challenge of the primary season to "bring it on," George W. Bush brought it on. In commercials and campaign speeches, Bush has Kerry in his sights. The battle has been joined.
Kerry is a fighter, as he has already shown not just on the campaign trail but in the jungles of Vietnam. In the Mekong Delta, Kerry went straight at the enemy, beaching his Navy swift boat and charging ashore, when more prudent commanders would have chosen evasion or retreat.
But there's a different strategy Kerry should consider as he maps out his general election campaign: A flanking maneuver on Bush's right.
Kerry is already taking a beating for what the Bushies characterize as a record of flip-flops (when they aren't characterizing it as a record of consistent, unabashed liberalism, that is). So Kerry should be careful about changing long-held positions. But he shouldn't hesitate to present his positions as evolving. Ordinary voters have seen their own positions evolve on issues like Iraq, taxes, deficits and gay rights. They'll forgive a candidate with the guts to simply say, "I've changed my mind."
But to mount a challenge to Bush's right, Kerry need not change his mind, just his emphasis and some of his language. Consider a few lines Kerry could work into his new stump speech:
Support the troops, not the defense contractors. While Halliburton is skimming millions in inflated charges, most of our troops in Iraq ride in unarmored Humvees more suited to suburban malls than battle zones. They write home asking for body armor instead of cookies. They order boots from LL Bean because the army-issue boots can't handle the desert. Kerry should hold the Bush Administration responsible.
Stop the unfunded mandates. In Republican Utah, the state House has voted to reject No Child Left Behind because the cost far outweighs the new federal school aid. Either provide the funding promised by NCLB and the federal special education law, Kerry should say, or drop the requirements.
Protect the homeland. Our ports are woefully unprotected, chemical plants are vulnerable and uninspected cargo is still being loaded onto passenger planes. Tom Ridge's color codes are a joke, not a plan. Kerry should promise to stop shortchanging homeland security.
Respect states' rights. John Ashcroft's federal agents have overridden the will of voters in several states that have approved the medical use of marijuana. He's gone to court to stop Oregon's assisted suicide law. Now Bush wants to make marriage a federal issue. Kerry should echo Reagan: Washington doesn't have all the answers.
Close the intelligence gap. We're counting on the same people who blew it on Iraq's WMD to find the insurgents in Iraq and terrorists around the world. Kerry should promise to fire CIA chief George Tenet and reform the intelligence structure from top to bottom.
Stop letting right-wing preachers set government policy. They are gagging Americans trying to stop the spread of AIDS overseas and stifling stem cell research here at home that could save countless lives. Kerry should promise to get the ideology out of government-funded science.
Mind your own business. Citing Bush's laundry list of social initiatives -- millions of taxpayers dollars to be spent on abstinence-only sex education, fighting steroid use, promoting marriage and mandatory school drug tests, for starters -- conservative commentator Andrew Sullivan calls Bush the "nanny-in-chief." Kerry would compromise no core Democratic values by promising a less meddlesome federal government.
Kerry should be able to criticize Bush's kowtowing to politicized preachers without offending people who take their religion seriously. He'll get few votes from Pat Robertson's audience anyway. But remember, Bush's faith-based initiative fell apart not because secular liberals opposed it, but because ministers didn't want their work infected by politics. Thinking people of all religious and political persuasions see the virtue of keeping some distance between government and church.
Bush is facing growing discontent among small-government conservatives over the deficit, the expansion of Medicare and federal intrusion into matters traditionally left to the states. The Patriot Act, the war on drugs and Bush's concessions to the religious right have irritated libertarian conservatives.
Kerry could exploit these divisions. Every time the Republicans jump on Kerry's liberalism, the Democrats should question whether Bush qualifies as a true conservative. Labels are a political game. By playing it smart, Kerry can at least blunt Bush's efforts to replay his father's 1988 attacks on Michael Dukakis.
At best, Kerry can make personal freedom a plank in the Democratic platform for years to come. That will win him votes in battleground states like New Hampshire and New Mexico. It could also put in play mountain states like Arizona, Nevada and Colorado, whose conservatism has always had a libertarian bent.
Conventional wisdom advises the Democratic nominee to retreat to the mushy middle, which, for Kerry, risks sapping the energy the primary campaign has generated in the Democratic base. Kerry should keep up the frontal assault that has gotten him this far -- but direct some carefully-targeted fire toward Bush's right flank, where opportunity awaits.
Only problem is, he just happened to change his mind on these items for obvious political reasons, not a real change of heart.
and killed an injured enemy soldier!
Support the troops, not the defense contractors. While Halliburton is skimming millions in inflated charges, most of our troops in Iraq ride in unarmored Humvees more suited to suburban malls than battle zones. They write home asking for body armor instead of cookies. They order boots from LL Bean because the army-issue boots can't handle the desert. Kerry should hold the Bush Administration responsible.
I could've swore a heap of that $87 million that John F'em Ke(rr)y voted against was earmarked for up-armored Humvees and body armor. I'll also bet if one dug through Ke(rr)y's voting record, you'll find a bunch of votes against the "little" stuff as well as the publicized votes against the F-14, F-15, F-16, B-1, B-2, AEGIS, the Tomahawk, M-1, M-2, et al.
Stop the unfunded mandates. In Republican Utah, the state House has voted to reject No Child Left Behind because the cost far outweighs the new federal school aid. Either provide the funding promised by NCLB and the federal special education law, Kerry should say, or drop the requirements.
If all the money hadn't been going to the overpaid, underperforming teachers, their union bosses, and their fellow unions in the construction trade, maybe, just maybe there would wouldn't be a cry for a massive tax hike (unfortunately, we're dealing with lieberals who would just fritter away the cash and change "No Child Left Behind" to "No Child Allowed Ahead").
Protect the homeland. Our ports are woefully unprotected, chemical plants are vulnerable and uninspected cargo is still being loaded onto passenger planes. Tom Ridge's color codes are a joke, not a plan. Kerry should promise to stop shortchanging homeland security.
We already federalized airport and seaport security. Considering Ke(rr)y has consistently shortchanged homeland security in the past, there's no indication that he would do anything constructive.
Respect states' rights. John Ashcroft's federal agents have overridden the will of voters in several states that have approved the medical use of marijuana. He's gone to court to stop Oregon's assisted suicide law. Now Bush wants to make marriage a federal issue. Kerry should echo Reagan: Washington doesn't have all the answers.
It sure seems that almost all the drug trade crosses a state border, thus making it fair game constitutionally. As for the defense of marriage, requiring 38 states to ratify a Constitutional amendment sure looks like the states are involved, while the lieberal plan to get an activist federal judge to require all states to honor and eventually adopt the lowest (un)common denominator smacks of federal abuse of judicial power run amok.
Close the intelligence gap. We're counting on the same people who blew it on Iraq's WMD to find the insurgents in Iraq and terrorists around the world. Kerry should promise to fire CIA chief George Tenet and reform the intelligence structure from top to bottom.
And Ke(rr)y, who never saw an intelligence bill he couldn't gut, is going to do that?
Stop letting right-wing preachers set government policy. They are gagging Americans trying to stop the spread of AIDS overseas and stifling stem cell research here at home that could save countless lives. Kerry should promise to get the ideology out of government-funded science.
Speaking of ideology, the last I checked, global warming (especially the human-caused variety), macroevolution and the Big Bang are unproved and unprovable theories, thus meeting the definition of ideology. I won't bring up the lowest (un)common denominator again (oops, I just did).
Mind your own business. Citing Bush's laundry list of social initiatives -- millions of taxpayers dollars to be spent on abstinence-only sex education, fighting steroid use, promoting marriage and mandatory school drug tests, for starters -- conservative commentator Andrew Sullivan calls Bush the "nanny-in-chief." Kerry would compromise no core Democratic values by promising a less meddlesome federal government.
Wrong; Ke(rr)y, IF HE WERE OF THAT FRAME OF MIND, would compromose THE core DemonRATic value; an all-intrusive federal government. What's worse, he is of the typical DemonRAT ilk.
Kerry should be able to criticize Bush's kowtowing to politicized preachers without offending people who take their religion seriously. He'll get few votes from Pat Robertson's audience anyway. But remember, Bush's faith-based initiative fell apart not because secular liberals opposed it, but because ministers didn't want their work infected by politics. Thinking people of all religious and political persuasions see the virtue of keeping some distance between government and church.
See Kalifornica's Supreme Kangaroo Court, which just imposed a social policy diametrically opposed to the Catholic Church on a Catholic charity because they had the audacity to try to do some social good.
Seeing I'm out of time to continue a point-by-point refutation, there's no way a HUGE-gubmint, Lowest UNcommon Denomonator DemonRAT like John F'em Ke(rr)y can repaint himself as a libertarian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.