Skip to comments.DEMSí ATTACK DU JOUR: HOMELAND SECURITY (Security and Democratic Politics -- RNC Research)
Posted on 05/23/2003 7:15:37 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
FROM: Governor Marc Racicot
DATE: May 22, 2003
RE: Security and Democratic Politics
This past weekend at a presidential candidate debate in Iowa a disturbing strategy to elect a Democratic president emerged. Without offering any credible solutions of their own and notwithstanding their own weak record on these issues, candidate after candidate attacked the President's security policies and leadership as commander-in-chief.
Their attacks are driven by a desire by Democrats to close the historic Republican advantage on security. The Democratic candidates for President have made that clear.
[W]e will not win the White House unless we make it clear to the American people that we will keep them safe and how we will keep them safe. (Senator John Edwards, Remarks At AFSCME Forum, 5/17/03)
And the fact is theyre not going to choose anyone who sends a message that is other than strength on defense and homeland security. (Senator Joe Lieberman, Remarks At South Carolina Debate, 5/3/03)
"What activists like Dean call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is an aberration: the McGovern-Mondale wing, defined principally by weakness abroad ... lost 49 states in two elections, and transformed Democrats from a strong national party into a much weaker regional one. The real tradition of the Democratic Party is grounded in ... standing up for a strong national defense and for America's interests in the world ..." ("The Real Soul of the Democratic Party," Democratic Leadership Council Memo, 5/15/03)
There is a reason Republicans are seen as strong on the national security question. We are.
Since September 11, 2001, the President and Republicans have been joined by many Democrats to pass important security initiatives, such as the Patriot Act, and, eventually, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. We know and understand that legitimate policy debates do exist and can lead, if carried on in good faith, to the improvement of the security of all Americans. But, many of the same Democrats who now criticize the Presidents efforts to protect our homeland opposed or now criticize legislation they supported which provides the President the tools to make us safer.
I have attached a research paper (see below) to this memorandum, which compares some of the rhetoric of the past weekend with some key votes/positions previously taken by the candidate critics. It is expected and essential that we remain on the cutting edge of the security requirements of this country. But, to assess the abilities and leadership capacity, it is also essential that we scrutinize the efforts of those who would be President to address the national and homeland security interests of America.
Democrats are trying to strengthen their own image on an issue on which Democrats have long been seen as weak by many Americans. (Steven Thomma, Bush Criticized On Homeland, The Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/19/03)
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): Bush Has Not Done Enough At Home. Nor has the Bush administration done enough to enhance security at home, according to Kerry The priorities and choices of this administration are wrong, he said. (Bryan Bender, Kerry Blasts Bush Over War On Terror, The Boston Globe, 5/19/03)
Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) Mocked Bush Homeland Security Policy. We should not cede this issue to a party and a president whose idea of homeland security is plastic wrap and duct tape. (Dan Balz, Democrats Criticize President On Economy, Security, The Washington Post, 5/18/03)
Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) Said Bush Has Ignored Homeland Security. [T]his Administration has ignored homeland security in all but name while it focused all its energy on Iraq. (Sen. Bob Graham, Remarks At Presidential Candidacy Announcement, Miami Lakes, FL, 5/6/03)
Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Criticized Bush Leadership On Homeland Security. Our states and localities also need more support. More funding. And more leadership from the President on down. (Sen. Joe Lieberman, Investing In homeland Security, Press Release, 5/15/03)
Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-MO) Said Administration Let America Down. [T]his administration has let America down in the area of homeland security. We are vulnerable to future attacks because this administration has not done its job, and has not increased our ability to have homeland security. (Rep. Dick Gephardt, Remarks At AFSCME Forum, 5/17/03)
Gov. Howard Dean (D-VT) Attacked Bush For Strangling Localities. [W]e have a president who talks tough on homeland security but is strangling the cities and the towns and not giving them the money thats necessary to protect them (Gov. Howard Dean, Remarks At AFSCME Forum, 5/17/03)
72% Trust President Bush To Better Conduct U.S. Campaign Against Terrorism. Only 21% chose the Democrats. 63% trust President Bush to do a better job handling Homeland Security over Democrats in Congress, while only 30% trust the Democrats more. (The Washington Post/ABC NewsPoll, 1,105 Adults Nationwide, Conducted 4/27-30/03, Margin Of Error +/- 3%)
Only 18% Think Democrat Party Is More Likely To Make The Right Decisions When It Comes To Terrorism. 58% believed the Republican Party is more likely. (CBS News/The New York Times Poll, 910 Adults Nationwide, Conducted 5/9-12/03, Margin Of Error +/- 3%)
86% In CBS News/New York Times Poll Think Bush Administration Has Made Progress In Protecting The Country Against Terrorism. (CBS News/The New York Times Poll, 910 Adults Nationwide, Conducted 5/9-12/03, Margin Of Error +/- 3%)
Democrats Struggle To Gain Credibility On Homeland Security. The Democratic candidates challenge to Bushs stand on homeland security comes as their party is struggling to raise public doubts about Bushs ability to protect American security. The Democrats have to be credible on security if were going to recapture the White House, said an adviser to one Democratic presidential campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity. (Steven Thomma, Bush Criticized On Homeland, The Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/19/03)
Democrat Attacks Not Embraced By Voters. Although some Democratic presidential candidates have sought to challenge Mr. Bushs foreign policy credentials by saying that Mr. Bush had not done enough to protect Americans from another terrorist attack, those warnings did not seem to have been embraced by voters. (Adam Nagourney and Janet Elder, Bushs Support Strong Despite Tax Cut Doubts, The New York Times, 5/14/03)
Republican-Led House Passed Homeland Security Department In Just One Month. Introduced on June 24, 2002, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 passed the House overwhelmingly just 32 days later without the support of Reps. Gephardt or Kucinich. (H.R. 5005, Introduced 6/24/02; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #367: Passed 295-132: R 207-10; D 88-120; I 0-2, 7/26/02, Gephardt And Kucinich Voted Nay)
Democrat Politics Slowed Homeland Security In Senate. Election-year politics are a chief reason for the Senates impasse on creating a Homeland Security Department. Democrats are refusing to buck their allies in organized labor and give President Bush the broad power he demands (Curt Anderson, Politics Hold Up Homeland Security, The Associated Press, 9/29/02)
Senate Democrat Presidential Candidates Fought Bushs Plans For Department. Edwards, Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman sided with labor unions against Bush in creating a Department of Homeland Security, voting 6 times against the Presidents plan. (H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #218: Motion Rejected 50-49: R 0-48; D 49-1; I 1-0, 9/19/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #225: Motion Rejected 49-49: R 1-47; D 47-2; I 1-0, 9/25/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #226: Motion Rejected 50-49: R 1-48; D 48-1; I 1-0, 9/26/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #227: Motion Rejected 44-53: R 1-46; D 42-7; I 1-0, 9/26/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #228: Motion Rejected 45-52: R 2-46; D 42-6; I 1-0, 10/1/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #241: Motion Agreed To 50-47: R 48-0; D 1-46; I 1-1, 11/13/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Nay)
Senate Dems Stalled Homeland Security For 112 Days. The Democrat Senate took 112 days to approve the Department of Homeland Security. In the end, after their stalling tactics failed, Sens. Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman voted for the bill. (H.R. 5005, Received In The Senate 7/30/2002; H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #249: Passed 90-9: R 48-0; D 41-8; I 1-1, 11/19/02, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea)
Gephardt Would Repeal Homeland Security Bill If Elected. I voted against that bill, and I suggest that we defeat that bill the first chance we get when we take back the White House. (Rep. Dick Gephardt, Remarks At AFSCME Forum, 5/17/03)M
Dean Says Department Is Mistake. Democratic Presidential candidate Howard Dean says the creation of a homeland security department was a mistake and that Tom Ridge is the wrong man for the job. I would not have created the Department of Homeland Security, the former Vermont governor told CQ Homeland Security. (Andrew Freedman, Dean Knocks Ridge, Says Homeland Department A Mistake, CQ Homeland Security, 5/20/03)
Senate Dems Voted For Patriot Act. Sens. Edwards, Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman voted to pass the Patriot Act. (H.R. 3162, CQ Vote #313: Passed 98-1: R 49-0; D 48-1; I 1-0, 10/25/01, Edwards, Graham, Kerry, And Lieberman Voted Yea)
Now, Dems Side With Kucinich Wing Of Democrat Party, Attacking Patriot Act:
* Sen. Kerry Concerned About Patriot Act, Says It Should Be Closely Reviewed. Kerry also expressed deep concern about the broad spying powers given to the governments USA Patriot Act, and suggested that it would be closely reviewed when its expiration date comes up next year. (Laura McClure, Dodging The War Issue, Again, Salon.com, 3/14/03)
* Sen. Edwards Criticized Administration Of Act. I think the problem with the Patriot Act is not the law itself, its the way its being administered, particularly the way its being administered by the Attorney General of the United States, General Ashcroft. And we have had consistent problems with this. (ABC News First In The Nation: The Democratic Debate, 5/4/03)
Rep. Kucinich Wants Patriot Act Abolished. As President, I will repeal the Patriot Act. (Liane Hansen, Nine Democratic Presidential Candidates Share Fireworks During Debate, National Public Radio, 5/4/03)
Now, Gephardt Says Intelligence Is Imperative. Its imperative that in addition to improving our ability to gather intelligence, we also do a better job of coordinating, disseminating and acting upon this intelligence. (Dan Eggen, FBI Warns Of Suicide Bombs, The Washington Post, 5/21/02)
* But Rep. Gephardt Has Voted Numerous Times To Slash Intelligence Budget. Gephardt has voted for several amendments to cut Intelligence funding cuts ranging from 0.7% to 5%. (H.R. 1655, CQ Vote #654: Rejected 162-262: R 37-193; D 124-69; I 1-0, 9/13/95, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 3259, CQ Vote #187: Rejected 192-235: R 37-193; D 154-42; I 1-0, 5/22/96, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 1775, CQ Vote #253: Rejected 142-289: R 27-198; D 114-91; I 1-0, 7/9/97, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 1775, CQ Vote #255: Rejected 182-238: R 23-199; D 158-39; I 1-0, 7/9/97, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 3694, CQ Vote #137: Rejected 120-291: R 21-196; D 98-95; I 1-0, 5/7/98, Gephardt Voted Yea)
* Gephardt Also Voted To Reveal Secret Intelligence Budget. Gephardt voted to disclose the amount of funding for U.S. intelligence programs a half dozen times. (H.R. 2330, CQ Vote #396: Rejected 169-264: R 6-166; D 162-98; I 1-0, 8/4/93, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 4299, CQ Vote #332: Rejected 194-221: R 17-155; D 176-66; I 1-0, 7/19/94, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 1655, CQ Vote #655: Rejected 154-271: R 12-217; D 141-54; I 1-0, 9/13/95, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 3259, CQ Vote #186: Rejected 176-248: R 18-210; D 157-38; I 1-0, 5/22/96, Gephardt Voted Yea; HR 1775, CQ Vote #254: Rejected 192-237: R 18-207; D 173-30; I 1-0, 7/9/97, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 4392, CQ Vote #214: Rejected 175-225: R 17-187; D 156-38; I 2-0, 5/23/00, Gephardt Voted Yea)
* And In 1993, Rep. Dick Gephardt Questioned Value Of Intelligence Community. House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt told [new CIA director R. James] Woolsey he would be under pressure to justify the intelligence communitys genuine value in a world that is growing increasingly impatient with secrecy and clandestine activity. (Ruth Sinai, Woolsey Says Intelligence Cuts Must Wait, The Associated Press, 3/9/93)
Now, Kerry Says Intelligence Is An Important Tool For Fighting Terrorism. The best single defense we have today, the most important weapon in the war against terrorism, is intelligence, good intelligence. Were way behind the curve in terms of human intelligence-gathering capacity as well as mutual legal-assistance efforts. Youve got to know who they are, where they are, what their plans are and hit them before they hit you. Thats intelligence. (Joe Eskenazi, Sen. John Kerry In S.F. Takes Tough Stance On Arafat, Jewish Bulletin, 4/5/02)* But In 1997, Kerry Questioned Size Of Intelligence Community. Now that [the Cold War] struggle is over, why is it that our vast intelligence apparatus continues to grow (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 5/1/97, p. S3891)* In 1994, Kerry Proposed Gutting $1 Billion From Intelligence. Kerry proposed cutting $1 billion from the budgets of the National Foreign Intelligence Program and from Tactical Intelligence and freeze their budgets. The amendment was soundly defeated, with even Graham, Lieberman, and Moseley Braun voting against Kerry. (S. Amdt. 1452, Introduced 2/9/94; H.R. 3759, CQ Vote #39: Rejected 20-75: R 3-37; D 17-38, 2/10/94, Kerry Voted Yea; Graham, Lieberman, And Moseley Braun Voted Nay)* In 1995, Kerry Joined Graham And Voted To Slash FBI Funding By $80 Million And In 1993 And 1997 To Reveal Top Secret Intelligence Budget. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480: Adopted 49-41: R 9-40; D 40-1, 9/29/95, Graham And Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1301, CQ Vote # 366: Rejected 49-51: R 40-4; D 9-47, 11/10/93, Graham And Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1301, CQ Vote # 367: Adopted 52-48: R 3-41; D 49-7, 11/10/93. Graham And Kerry Voted Yea; S. 858, CQ Vote #108: Rejected 43-56: R 1-54; D 42-2, 6/19/97, Graham And Kerry Voted Yea)
Clinton FBI Director Louis Freeh: [Bush] is a president who is serious about fighting and winning the war on terrorism. The liberation of Iraq and the continued effort to bring al Qaeda to justice are all the proof anyone should need. (Louis J. Freeh, Remember Khobar Towers, The Wall Street Journal, 5/20/03)
Bush Included $3.5 Billion For First Responders In FY03 Budget, An Additional $3.5 Billion In FY04 Budget. (Budget Of The United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, The White House, 2/4/02; Budget Of The United States Government, Fiscal Year 2004, The White House, 2/3/03)
Democrat-Controlled Senate Failed To Pass Budget In 2002, Delaying Bushs $3.5 Billion Request For First Responders Until GOP Regained Senate. (Public Law No. 108-7, 2/20/03)
Over 55,000 State And Local First Responders Trained On Homeland Security Preparedness. Office for Domestic Preparedness has provided training to emergency responders, including over 34,000 personnel in Fiscal Year 2001, and more than 21,000 to date in FY 2002. (Justice Department Accomplishments In The War On Terrorism, U.S. Department Of Justice)
Already In FY 2003, Homeland Security Department Has Made Almost $3.8 Billion In Grants Available To States And Localities For First Responders, Mass Transit System Protection, And Port Security. (Department Of Homeland Security Funding For States And Cities, Department Of Homeland Security, 5/21/03)
From 1999-2002, Almost $500 Million In Federal Domestic Preparedness Grants Were Made Available To State Governments, But Over $331 Million Still Remains Unspent. (Equipment Grant Allocation Distributions: FY99-02, Department Of Homeland Security Office For Domestic Preparedness, 2/24/03)
* In Vermont, Then-Governor Howard Dean Left Almost $2.2 Million In Grants Unspent. (Equipment Grant Allocation Distributions: FY99-02, Department Of Homeland Security Office For Domestic Preparedness, 2/24/03)
State Department: 2002 Terrorism Lowest In Over 30 Years.[T]here were 199 terrorist attacks in 2002, a 44 percent drop from 2001. (David Gollust, US Report Says Terror Attacks Declined Sharply Last Year, Voice Of America News, 4/30/03)
Iraq War Didnt Slow Fighting In Afghanistan. The U.S. Army said it had launched a fresh military operation in southern Afghanistan this morning with an air assault southeast of the city of Kandahar. The operation came the same day that the U.S. launched a war against Iraq (U.S. Troops Launch Afghan Assault, Los Angeles Times, 3/20/03)
Grahams Attacks On War Progress Lack Logic Or Merit. Grahams claim that the liberation of Iraq is a distraction from terrorism seems lacking in logic or merit. (Editorial, Terrorism, A Spying Shame, Florida Times-Union, 5/16/03)
War In Iraq Didnt Distract From Al Qaeda Hunt. [T]he capture Saturday of alleged September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the biggest prize so far. Mohammeds capture is also a direct rebuttal to the argument that the Bush Administrations focus on Iraq distracts from the pursuit of al Qaeda. (Editorial, Al Qaeda On The Run, The Wall Street Journal, 3/3/03)
The Numbers Tell The Story:
* Captured Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Al Qaedas Chief Of Operations And One Of FBIs Most Wanted Terrorists. (Most Wanted Terrorists, FBI Website, www.fbi.gov, Accessed 5/20/03)
* $125 Million In Assets Frozen From 62 Terrorist-Supporting Organizations. (Justice Department Accomplishments In The War On Terrorism, U.S. Department Of Justice; Results In War On Terror, FBI Website, www.fbi.gov, Accessed 5/20/03)
* More Than 3,000 Al Qaeda Leaders And Foot Soldiers Captured In War On Terror Around World. (Results In War On Terror, FBI Website, www.fbi.gov, Accessed 5/20/03)
Following 9/11, Justice Department Began Largest Criminal Investigation In U.S. History Resulting In 237 Individuals Charged In Terrorism-Related Investigations, 119 Guilty (Through Plea Or A Trial), And 478 Individuals Deported. (Justice Department Accomplishments In The War On Terrorism, U.S. Department Of Justice)
Among Many Others, Federal Government Has Brought To Justice:
Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi and Fahd Mohammed Ahmed Al-Quso(50 counts of various terrorism offenses related to bombing of USS Cole); Zacarias Moussaoui (six counts of conspiracy connected with Sept. 11 attacks.); John Walker Lindh (guilty of aiding the Taliban.); Richard Reid (the alleged shoe bomber - charged as a trained terrorist who attempted to destroy American Airlines Flight 63.); Rasmi Subhi Saleh Al Shannaq (former roommate of two of September 11 hijackers, which led to 40 arrests in a visa fraud scheme.); Luis Martinez-Flores and Herbert Villalobos (pled guilty to fraud for helping hijackers obtain identification documents.); Maher Jarad (indicted for alleged smuggling of Middle Eastern aliens.); Earnest James Ujaama (charged in Seattle with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists); 18 terrorists in United States from cells in Buffalo, Portland, and Detroit; and [a]pproximately 1,400 airport workers and individuals were charged with falsifying documents and violating immigration laws, as well as other offenses, at over 40 major airports nationwide. (Department Of Justice, Press Release, 5/15/03; Justice Department Accomplishments In The War On Terrorism, U.S. Department Of Justice; Results In War On Terror, FBI Website, www.fbi.gov, Accessed 5/20/03)
A Publication of the RNC Research Department
So who's kidding whom here?
Of course, the rats are banking on (and rightly so)that people are basically stupid, and won't recall just what happened.
Right there is a main difference between the GOP and RAT positions and style.
The GOP usually gives pages of facts for a comprehensive discussion. The RATs shreik back volumes of emotion-laden rhetoric to smother the opposition.
It's little different than what we are treated to daily on cable talking head "discussion" shows. When the Good Guy makes a point, the Bad Guy talks over him and his point is hopelessly lost.
RAT voters and those too lazy to read and think (but, alas, I repeat myself) soak up emotion-laden rhetoric and combative shreiks and parrot it for their very own. There is generally no sane discussion of actual, defendable positions. Why? Because their positions are typically indefensible and they would lose. So, it's attack with all guns a-blazing!
This is too funny, coming from the Party that sees Homeland Security for only one purpose:
To increase one of their natural "bases", government union workers.
Thanks for the post of this valuable info. Added to favorites.
ALSO, see this article everybody !:
They think that war, terrorism, justice and economic growth are just political games, things to block, cheat and lie about to win power.
Unaware that impending death, the end of the American nation, loss of jobs, economic crisis and detrimental impact on our health are adult matters, and potentially quite serious, the 'Rats and their immoral valueless leaders instead respond like children to these, the most significant threats to the American Republic in a half-century.
Responding to, and compromising with, these whining babies is dangerous and foolish, and consumes valuable time and money.
Ignore them and their media shills, and get on with governing the country.
America will remember the difference.
I AGREE!! (And, surprise, surprise~~~I passed on the President's reelection website and two Manhattanites signed up and volunteered to help reelect him. It will be the first time they vote Republican; and they're excited about it!)