Kerry's Debate Briefing Book --- Debate 1 --- Foreign Policy

Rudy Giuliani has obtained a copy of the Kerry teams briefing book for Debate 1, when the presidential candidates will compare foreign policy ideas.

"Senator Kerry has taken so many different positions on the issues facing the country that we thought he would benefit from the overview of the most interesting debate -- the one John Kerry is having with himself. He's been for the war, against the war and for it and against it again. Last week, he became an anti-war candidate again. This is a fatal flaw and the American people see through it. John Kerry is not able to take a principled position and is the wrong choice to guide America through this critical time."

The true masochists among you may click here to view the document in .pdf format. For those who'd rather (I love that word!) not, I've converted it to .html.

This blank space brought to you by www.photobucket.com

Issue: Iraq

Your Current Position

  • The removal of Saddam Hussein has left America less secure. You are currently against the war and wouldn't have gone to war, but you used to be for the war before you were against the war before you were for the war.

Your Record

You voted for “the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.” Now you say the war you voted for made us “less safe.”

You said voting against the funding for the war would be “irresponsible.” That was before you voted against the funds. You said “it would be naïve to the point of grave danger” not to confront Saddam Hussein.

During the Democrat primaries, you said, “I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.” That was before the surge of Howard Dean led you to declare yourself an “anti-war” candidate.

You are saying your vote for the war was a vote to “authorize” war so America could send a united message to Saddam. But don't forget in 1991 you said, “This is


not a vote about a message. It is a vote about war.”

You are saying the removal of Saddam Hussein has left America “less secure.” Unfortunately, you also told Howard Dean, “Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president.”

You are saying the U.S. is spending too much money on Iraq, but in August 2003, you said we need to increase funding for Iraq “by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win.”

You refused to take a position on whether or not the war you voted for was “illegal.”

You have said knowing everything you know now, you still would have voted for the war but knowing everything we know now the war was a mistake.

Your Attacks

Pretend like no position you have ever taken matters. Political opportunity, pessimism and the implication of inevitable defeat is the key here. Nobody knows what you really believe anyway.


Issue: Diplomacy

Your Current Position

President Bush is a unilateralist (don't count the 30 nations in Iraq), and you are a multilateralist, except when you insult our allies (then you are an opportunist).

Your Record

You said Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi doesn't know what's happening in his own country, and made a political attack on him moments after he thanked the American people for the liberation of his country.

You said we need more allies, but you have called our allies “coerced,” “bribed,” “fraudulent,” “window dressing” and “barely willing to do anything at all.” This probably won't help you recruit more allies, but you don't think that's going to happen anyway.

You have characterized our troops in Iraq as “occupiers.” Try not to use that word. Your Democratic colleague Senator Miller will come down on you and so will most Americans.

You said the President “rushed to war,” and you cited the first Gulf War as a model of diplomacy. Of course, six months separated the vote for the war and the beginning of the war. That is six months


longer than it took for the first Gulf War that you now praise but voted against. (It started two days after the vote.) You once asked, “Where’s the backbone of Russia, where’s the backbone of France” to confront Iraq. Now you are claiming the President just had to wait a little longer, and they would have helped.

You once claimed you “heard from” foreign leaders who supported your election, and said you can meet foreign leaders in any New York City restaurant. During your convention you implied that the use of force is only required AFTER America is attacked. So your current position on preemption is “against.”

Your Attack

Imply you can get nations like France and Germany to help in Iraq, even though France and Germany have said they won't help. Say you didn't mean to attack Prime Minister Allawi, but Carville and Begala have been lecturing you about rapid response.


Issue: Intelligence

Your Current Position

  • The Administration is moving too slowly on intelligence reform.

Your Record

In 1994, you proposed $6 billion in across the board cuts to intelligence after the first World Trade Center bombing. These cuts didn't receive much support. You were actually the only Senator from Massachusetts to vote for them.

Sen. Inouye (D-HI) said your bill “would severely hamper” intelligence efforts.

You missed 76 percent of public Senate Intelligence Committee hearings and we are trying to keep the private attendance record under wraps.

Edwards also missed 69 percent of his public Senate Intelligence Committee hearings. Unfortunately, that is his main national security experience.

In 1995, you voted to cut $80 million in FBI funding for counterterrorism.

Your Attack

Say the President is going too slowly. (Except for the 36 of the 41 9/11 Commission proposals that he is implementing.)


Issue: Troop Realignment

Your Current Position

• Troop realignment is bad - you have said troop realignment “does not strengthen our hand in the war on terror.”

Your Record

Troop realignment is good - specifically, you wanted to shift troops “in the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps.”

Your Attack

This didn't go so well last time, so you might want to stay away from it. But remember if they ask, you said “perhaps” so it doesn't count!


Issue: Afghanistan

Your Current Position

• Afghanistan is where the War on Terror really belongs.

Your Record

You previously said the War on Terror “doesn’t end with Afghanistan,” and we needed to move on to address other threats “for instance, Saddam Hussein.”

Now you believe Iraq is a distraction from Afghanistan.

You voted against the $87 billion that included funds for ammunition and body armor for troops in Afghanistan.

Your Attack

Afghanistan is being neglected, even though you voted against funds for our troops there.


Issue: North Korea

Your Current Position

• We need to negotiate directly with the North Koreans.

Your Record

You seek a return to the failed Clinton era policies of signing deals with the North Korean government that they have no intention to honor. You have called the multilateral negotiations “basically a cover,” arguing that they aren't legitimate.

The state-run media of North Korea has reported: “Senator Kerry, who is seeking the presidential candidacy of the Democratic Party, sharply criticised President Bush, saying it was an ill-considered act to deny direct dialogue with North Korea.”

You have said the President “talks the game but doesn't deliver,” but it isn't clear your concessions on the talks would deliver anything to anyone but the North Koreans.

Your Attack

The President should negotiate directly with the North Koreans, even though that strategy has already failed.


Issue: Israel

Your Current Position

• You are for/against the Israeli security fence. It is both a “barrier to peace” and a “legitimate act of self defense.”

Your Record

The Israeli security fence is a “barrier to peace” when you are talking to Arab audiences (Remarks Before Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference, Dearborn, MI, 10/17/03) and a “legitimate act of self defense” when you are talking to Jewish audiences (Janine Zacharia, “Kerry Defends Security Fence,” The Jerusalem Post, 2/25/04).

You wrote in your book, The New War, that Yasser Arafat is a “statesman” and a “role model.” This is the same book in which you warned that the Japanese Yakuza would be a major threat to our future.

Your Attack

The President is not exhibiting leadership on this issue. (Ignore your own split positions, and don't ever get your positions mixed up with the wrong audience. The consequences could be disastrous.)


Issue: Cuba

Your Current Position

  • You said you voted for the Helms-Burton Act, which cracked down on companies dealing with Cuba. (Peter Wallsten, “Kerry’s Cuba Stances Open To Attack,” The Miami Herald, 3/14/04)

Your Record

You voted against the Helms-Burton Act, but now you say you actually voted for it. Try not mess that up again.

Your latest position is that you would not lift the embargo against Cuba, but in 2000 you said Florida politics were the only reason the embargo was still in place and that a reevaluation is way overdue.” Unfortunately, last year you explained that comment by saying you were “being honest.” That does raise the uncomfortable question of what you are being now.

You voted to ease sanctions against Cuba and said you were skeptical” of the embargo. That was when you were “being honest.”

You supported a commission to study if Cuba was still a threat. Again: “being honest.”

Your Attack

Disregard your own record and statements and attack.


Issue: The Patriot Act

Your Current Position

• The Patriot Act is bad and you plan on “replacing the Patriot Act with a new law.”

Your Record

You voted for the Patriot Act, and said on the Senate floor that you were “pleased” with the Patriot Act.

You said the wiretap provision modernizes our ability to fight crime.” (That was before you wanted to weaken the wiretap provisions.)

During the primaries, you discovered Democrats didn't like the Patriot Act. That's when you changed your position to be for “replacing” the Patriot Act.

After discovering other people didn't like the Patriot Act, you attacked it, calling it a “knock in the night” and saying it didn'tprotect “our liberties.”

Your Attack

Don't mention the Patriot Act gives law enforcement the same tools to use against terrorists that they already use against drug dealers.


Homeland Security

Your Current Position

  • You say the War on Terror is “far more of a law enforcement and intelligence operation
    than it is a day-to-day huge military operation.”

Your Record

You delayed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security by 112 days because you wanted national security workers to unionized.

You skipped last year's vote the $29.3 billion Homeland Security appropriation.

Your Attack

The President delayed and underfunded the Homeland Security Department.

The truth is the President has tripled funding for homeland security since 2001, but a little extra stretch of the truth won't hurt your damaged credibility further.


If I saved you a headache by converting this to .html for you, there's a tip jar near the top of my sidebar. (Hint! Hint!)


At 11:50 AM, Blogger Sergeant America said...

Good effort!...

TB to your posting. One must get ready for tomorrow's journey into the ___________ (you fill in the blank)...

Not expecting much and I'm sure I won't be disappointed...(if only Kerry would put a bag over his head...)...


Post a Comment

<< Home