Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Analysis Of Kerry's Iraq Statements

The GOP B.S. machine is so busy spewing out flip-flop charges against Kerry that people might actually start to believe them. Here's an article that won't get the publicity it deserves. Marc Sandalow of the San Francisco Chronicle's Washington bureau talks about the Republican spin, then counters
Yet an examination of Kerry's words in more than 200 speeches and statements, comments during candidate forums and answers to reporters' questions does not support the accusation.
As foreign policy emerged as a dominant issue in the Democratic primaries and later in the general election, Kerry clung to a nuanced, middle-of-the road -- yet largely consistent -- approach to Iraq. Over and over, Kerry enthusiastically supported a confrontation with Saddam Hussein even as he aggressively criticized Bush for the manner in which he did so.
Kerry repeatedly described Hussein as a dangerous menace who must be disarmed or eliminated, demanded that the U.S. build broad international support for any action in Iraq and insisted that the nation had better plan for the post-war peace.
The article takes on my favorite GOP lie, wherein they imply that Kerry flip-flopped on funding the Iraq war and therefore doesn't support the troops:
Kerry voted for a measure that paid for the $87 billion by reducing tax cuts for those who earn more than $300,000. He voted against a measure that paid for the $87 billion by adding to the deficit.
Every time I hear Bush, Cheney, et al try to use that against Kerry, my blood boils, and not just because those chicken hawks dare to question the commitment to the military of a guy who actually fought. The supposedly fiscally conservative Republicans have been screwing our nation for a quarter of a century by growing the deficit to fund the military (usually starving domestic programs) while giving their wealthiest constituents tax cuts. Kerry didn't want to run up our national credit card to fund this war, but the Bush people eschew fiscal responsibility.

The real genius of the Reagan Revolution was the way the Republicans used Reagan's deficit spending to handcuff Clinton and force him to reduce the deficit their party had created. Clinton managed to get us into a budget surplus, but then America (or rather, the Supreme Court) handed the reins over to another Republican who uses Reagan's exact same tactics. If we don't elect Kerry, we're just going to keep on getting deeper into debt. Since so many Americans are up to their eyeballs in debt themselves, they don't see the problem with this. Of course, if we do elect Kerry, the Republicans will hold his feet to the fire to reduce the deficit they created. And so it goes.

No comments: