Jewish World Review April 28, 2004 / 7 Iyar, 5764

Peter A. Brown

JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Kerry not weak on defense — just wrong | The crucial issue is not whether John Kerry is "soft" on defense, but whether U.S. national security would be at risk with him in the Oval Office. This is much more than a semantic dispute, and it lies at the heart of the debate about whose worldview should prevail.

Kerry wants to link U.S. foreign policy to participation in - and a willingness to be constrained by - international organizations, such as the United Nations. He gets it from his father, a State Department diplomat who criticized U.S. Cold War policies as blind to world opinion and unreasonably harsh on the Soviet Union.

President Bush, evidenced by his willingness to buck the United Nations and many allies during his term to pursue U.S. interests, has starkly different priorities. Spotlighting those differences, as do Bush's TV commercials, is not dirty politics. The ads don't question Kerry's patriotism, as he claims, just his judgment.

That is what campaigns in a free country should be about. Kerry's Senate votes and proposals are fair game, as is Bush's record.

Kerry has spent his career criticizing the use of U.S. troops (Vietnam, Iraq 1991 and Iraq 2003) overseas. He pushed CIA and Pentagon budget cuts that even Al Gore opposed. He championed a nuclear freeze in the 1980s in opposition to Ronald Reagan's peace-through-strength stance that Kerry worried would start World War III. Instead, Reagan's approach won the Cold War.

Efforts by Kerry and his minions to distract attention from his record, and label the questions about it as attacks on his patriotism, are horse hockey:

_Kerry's willingness to give U.N. members greater voice in U.S. foreign policy is wrong for America, unless one thinks the views and values in Paris should carry the same weight as those in Peoria.

_Kerry's opposition to forcing Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in 1991 was, in hindsight, especially shortsighted and would have been disastrous.

_His vote last year against funding the postwar occupation of Iraq was not only wrong but irresponsible, given his vote supporting the war.

Kerry is a decorated Vietnam War veteran, which has led many Democrats to argue (perhaps they are trying to convince themselves) that he can't be 2004's George McGovern or Michael Dukakis. McGovern and Dukakis were the losing Democratic nominees in 1972 and 1988, respectively, because voters didn't trust them to defend the national security.

Democrats hope Kerry's war record will immunize him against criticism, as though a candidate's biography outweighs his plans and proposals. They hope voters will figure it is more important that Kerry served 35 years ago, than whether he's a suitable president for the 21st century.

But then, some still believe Dukakis lost in 1988 because he looked weak riding in a tank, or somehow couldn't come up with a tough defense of his opposition to capital punishment in a televised debate.

Yeah, right.

Donate to JWR

Dukakis lost because he was out of sync with middle-class voters, especially on defense matters, and did not fit their definition of a strong leader. He, like Kerry, favored lower defense spending and was less supportive of using military force to protect U.S. interests than was his GOP opponent.

McGovern, who flew bombers in World War II, was, like Kerry, a war hero, yet voters rejected his foreign policy as hopelessly naive. So is Kerry's, and he can't hide his record on national defense behind an honorable discharge and medals.

Jimmy Carter was a military veteran, too, but he was a lousy commander in chief. You might remember the U.S. humiliation in Iran on his watch. Nevertheless, Democrats were gleeful when Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a Republican who was a prisoner of war during Vietnam, said he did not believe Kerry was "weak" on defense matters. That's because they are so concerned Kerry not appear as weak as Dukakis, they didn't listen to the entirety of McCain's comments.

"No, I don't believe that he is quote `weak on defense,''' McCain said. But he also added this: "He is responsible for his voting record, as we all are responsible for our voting record, and he'll have to defend it."

Yet Democrats cry foul about Bush's ads that attack Kerry's foreign-policy record. But those commercials don't call Kerry soft or weak; they say he is "wrong on defense."

So let's dispense with the semantics and stipulate that Kerry is not "weak" on defense. He's just very, very wrong on the national-security issues that matter in a dangerous world.

Peter A. Brown is an editorial page columnist for the Orlando Sentinel. Comment by clicking here.


04/22/04: No attacks in U.S. since 9-11: Why?
04/16/04: Schools should focus on boys — now
03/16/04: Scalia recusing could give Kerry a bruising
03/04/04: Abortion, gay marriage show hypocrisy
03/01/04: Politicians can't repeal economic laws
02/19/04: The question prez, Kerry won't debate
01/21/04: Dems trying oh so hard to keep tired issue alive
01/21/04: Can whiners ever see positive side?
12/23/04: UN proves yet again it's dangerously misguided
11/18/03: U.N. oversight of Internet: Dumb idea
11/11/03: Absent change, GOP trend continues
10/28/03: Soft-on-defense stereotype — no wonder
10/22/03: Bet on Bush and the economy
09/23/03: France's time to decide: Friend or foe
09/16/03: Alabama no fluke in rejecting tax hike
09/03/03: Why Bush, Dean will win big in California recall
08/12/03: Hypocrisy from anti-death-penalty crowd
08/05/03: The rule of law or the Golden Rule?
07/22/03: A cautionary tale for those who naively believe that political posturing can override the laws of economics
06/24/03: Let seniors make their own choices
06/03/03: Bush bucks NRA to woo soccer moms
05/28/03: Bail out states? It's not D.C.'s job
05/20/03: Lawyers' party hits a new low
05/13/03: Bush mimics Nixon, Reagan by going against the political grain

© 2003, Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services