The Big Election is a week away and Christmas is one month away. And yesterday it seemed as if Massachusetts Senator John Kerry gave the Republicans’ “we’re-on-the-defensive” campaign a nice, big early Christmas gift, tidily packaged, neatly wrapped and ready for immediate use.
Kerry made a comment that GOPers — with President George W. Bush gleefully in the forefront — could paint as a slander on American troops’ intelligence (and Bush added bravery to boot). It was a comment Kerry could logically insist was aimed at Bush’s wiseness and lack of contingency planning on Iraq and not American troops. He could (and did) say it was being twisted around by Bush, perhaps stage managed by Karl Rove and then picked up by GOP talking heads, talk show hosts and Republican candidates who began demanding that their Democratic opponents repudiate John Kerry.
But three questions immediately arise:
- Is John Kerry the “gift that keeps on giving” to the GOP and President George Bush? Is he shockingly a beat behind where a (supposedly) professional politician should be — not anticipating the weight and use of his words? (Prediction: Senator Kerry better NOT place a bet in Vegas about getting the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination after yesterday.)
- Did Bush’s immediate demand that Kerry apologize, suggesting that Kerry was verbally sliming all U.S. troops do something that will HURT the GOP: thrust BUSH and the IRAQ WAR firmly back into the spotlight? Was he in effect nationalizing an election that GOPers had wanted to localize? How will independent voters and some Democrats who voted for the GOP in the past and are now upset by the war react to seeing Bush’s comments on Kerry’s verbal foot-in-mouth attack?
- Will any of this matter? Or are those who are already angry at the administration’s justifications for the war, implementation of the war, other policies under fire and the Republican Congress feel more motivated than ever to vote to ensure that their vote is cast to offset possible Republican base votes and bring about a change. Can John Kerry’s politically unwise choice of words and/or dumb statement (choose one or both) trump and reverse the polls?
One thing is clear: for a professional politician John Kerry should have known better. The Washington Post:
President Bush last night accused Sen. John F. Kerry of disparaging U.S. troops in Iraq, echoing the 2004 strategy of ridiculing the Massachusetts senator to raise anew questions about Democratic leaders and their commitment to the troops. The highly coordinated White House effort came as Republicans sought to shift the focus away from an unpopular war and GOP scandals that are putting their congressional majorities at risk.
The controversy erupted after Kerry told a California audience on Monday: “Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
You can watch the video HERE. A Kerry spokesman later said that Kerry messed up what he meant to say:
“I can’t overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq.â€? – Senator John Kerry (via Kerry spokesperson)
Kerry later made it clear in a press conference that he indeed was talking about George Bush and not the troops.
He didn’t mince words in his press conference, either (the transcript is HERE):
I’m sick and tired of a bunch of despicable Republicans who will not debate real policy, who won’t take responsibility for their own mistakes, standing up and trying to make other people the butt of those mistakes. I’m sick and tired of a whole bunch of Republican attacks, most of which come from people who never wore the uniform and never had the courage to stand up and go to war themselves. Enough is enough. We’re not going to stand for this.
This policy is broken—and this president and his administration didn’t do their homework. They didn’t study what would happen in Iraq. They didn’t study and listen to the people who were the experts and would have told them, and they know that’s what I was talking about yesterday. I’m not going to be lectured by the White House or by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who’s taking a day off from mimicking and attacking Michael J. Fox and who’s now going to try to attack me, and lie about me, and distort me. No way. It disgusts me that a bunch of these Republican hacks who have never worn the uniform of our country are willing to lie about those who did. It’s over.
This administration has given us a Katrina foreign policy—mistake upon mistake upon mistake.
Late Tuesday afternoon, Bush told a cheering throng in Georgia that Kerry’s remarks were “insulting” and “shameful,” and he called on him to apologize to U.S. troops.
Earlier in the day, Kerry had rejected similar calls from other Republicans. At a hastily arranged news conference in Seattle, Kerry said his comment was “a botched joke about the president and the president’s people, not about the troops,” and he renewed his attacks on what he termed Bush’s “broken policy” in Iraq.
Later, responding directly to Bush in a statement, Kerry said: “This pathetic attempt to distort a botched joke about President Bush is a shameful effort to distract from a botched war.”
The pointed criticism of Kerry made clear that the GOP believed he had provided an opening to press its case that Democrats could not be trusted to safeguard America’s national security — an argument Republicans hoped would turn voters to their side in a number of Tuesday’s House and Senate races.
White House Press Secretary Tony Snow blasted Kerry and essentially said Democrats now had to prove whether they agreed with Kerry or not:
White House press secretary Tony Snow was asked about Kerry’s comment at his regular briefing with reporters, and had clearly come prepared with a lengthy attack. He said the quote “fits a pattern” of negative remarks about U.S. soldiers from the decorated Vietnam veteran and suggested that whether Democratic candidates — particularly those running on their military service backgrounds — agree with their 2004 standard-bearer should be a campaign litmus test.
Meanwhile, in what clearly seemed to be a coordinated campaign strategy, Republican candidates started using the Kerry comments to try and put Democrats on the defensive:
Republicans are trying a seemingly successful technique found in Democratic campaign playbooks, linking their opponent to an objectionable gaffe much the way Democrats have pinned Republican candidates to politically unpopular President Bush.
That appears to be the game plan as the GOP seeks to make John Kerry a last-minute issue before next Tuesday’s midterm election by demanding to know whether their Democratic opponents support the Massachusetts senator’s recent criticism of U.S. troops in Iraq.
“Sen. Cantwell is Sen. Kerry’s host in our state,” reads a press release from Mike McGavick, Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell’s Republican opponent. “She has evaded comment time and time again in this campaign. Not this time. Sen. Cantwell owes Washington’s veterans and soldiers an explanation. She has taken Sen. Kerry’s money. Does she also accept his comments?”
But was there a danger for the GOP in the way Bush and the White House seized on the Kerry comments? The New York Times raises the issue:
In the process, Mr. Bush brought renewed attention to the war in Iraq, which he defended with vigor while campaigning in Georgia, at the very moment that a number of Republican Congressional candidates, following the advice of party strategists, were stepping up their efforts to distance themselves from the White House on the war as the campaign enters its final days.
“President Bush isn’t getting our frustrations — it’s time to be decisive, beat the terrorists,� Mike McGavick, the Republican candidate for Senate in Washington, said in an advertisement that began running this week. “Partition the country if we have to and get our troops home in victory.�
In Rhode Island on Tuesday, Senator Lincoln Chafee, a Republican struggling against a challenge from Sheldon Whitehouse, an antiwar Democrat, began a new television advertisement reminding Rhode Island voters, “I stood against the Senate and president and voted no� on the war.
In a debate a day earlier, Mr. Chafee indicated he would be willing to call on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to step down; Mr. Whitehouse has been pressing Mr. Chafee to do just that in his television advertisements. In Tennessee, Bob Corker, a Republican candidate for Senate, said it was time for a new plan and a change in leadership at the Pentagon.
In New Jersey, Thomas H. Kean Jr., the Republican challenging Senator Robert Menendez, has started a new advertisement that says he wants to “change the course in Iraq; Replace Rumsfeld.� In Indiana, John Hostettler, a Republican congressman, reminds voters in his latest advertisement that he voted against the invasion of Iraq because “the intelligence did not support the claim that there were weapons of mass destruction there.�
To date, none of the Republicans who have spoken out have called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and some had expressed previous reservations about the war or opposed it initially. But their willingness to break so publicly with the White House in the closing days of the campaign — in some cases, with the active encouragement of the some of the party’s own strategists — is evidence of the extent to which they view the war in Iraq as a lethal issue this fall.
Andrew Sullivan believes Kerry is a liability:
Bush does the obvious. Kerry gives him the chance. This is politics. Bush has no coherent argument for his party or his record. This is not what this election is or should be about. But Kerry is the gift that keeps on giving, isn’t he? He just rallied the base – the Republican base – more successfully than Karl Rove could. Someone very close to the president once observed that Bush’s signature theme is his luck. Above all, he is lucky in his enemies. And how.
Later, Sullivan added this:
What Kerry said he must apologize for. Sooner rather than later. He may not have meant it the way it came out. That doesn’t matter. It’s wrong to talk about the military that way – wrong morally, empirically and ethically. And the way he said it can be construed as a patronizing snub to the men and women whose lives are on the line. It’s also dumb politically not to kill this off in one news cycle. Is Kerry not content to lose just one election? Does his enormous ego have to insist on losing two?
So the questions arise:
- Will Bush and the GOP succeed in turning the campaign in its final days into referendum on their interpretation of what John Kerry said and meant and insisting that Democrats repudiate their explanation of what he meant?
- Will John Kerry leave it the way it is and in the end discover that his party suffers? Will he, as Sullivan suggests, go down as a Democrat who cost his party two elections?
- Will Kerry move to limit the damage and get out of the way — and the spotlight (realizing that if he doesn’t he will be totally out of the spotlight in 2008 if his party suffers).
- Will GOP use of this controversy backfire because while it might get more of the base out to vote it may also scare and anger independents and moderate Democrats (not to mention Goldwater conservatives and people who liked the administration of the first President Bush) who want to see this election bring about change and/or start the process of prying the present GOP party elite off of the levers of Republican power? Will the make SURE that hell or high water they get out to vote to “throw the bums out?”
Stay tuned to a talk show with shouting heads near you…and to Nov. 7.
A MUST READ: Our co-blogger Michael Stickings’ post on The Reaction.
UPDATE I: Time Magazine excerpt:
You’ve got to wonder about John Kerry’s eye-hand coordination. His career is falling into a pattern. Whenever Kerry is confronted with a big decision, he tries to compensate for his last mistake…Could Karl Rove have dreamed up a better October surprise than having the Democrats’ most recent choice for Commander in Chief suggest that the men and women are dying there because they weren’t smart enough to get into law school?
In other words, Kerry has managed on the eve of what could be a watershed election to remind pretty much everyone what it was they didn’t like about the Democrats, and especially what they didn’t like about him. It might have made more sense just to say he was sorry — for once to get ahead of a mistake, instead of trying to compensate for it the next time.
UPDATE II: Kerry tells Don Imus that it’s like being “Swiftboated” all over again. VIDEO HERE.
A CROSS-SECTION OF VARYING VIEWS:
—Glenn Reynolds has a big roundup and says this: “They managed to stifle Dukakis. They can’t seem to keep Kerry quiet.”
Whatever Kerry meant to say, it provided plenty of grist for feigned outrage from Republicans. It certainly didn’t sound good. But I take it as a given that it was a botched jab at President Bush because I don’t believe a bunch of Republicans who never served in the military have more respect for the military than a Democrat who did. But that’s life. Republicans are looking for everything they can get. Fine.
But it’s important not to forget one thing. John Kerry isn’t the Democratic party. And this election isn’t about John Kerry. It’s about Iraq. It’s about the man who’s actually president, the man whose policies have led to the disaster the country is facing. George W. Bush.
—Michelle Malkin: “There’s a five-alarm firestorm spreading over the radio airwaves and Internet in response to John Kerry’s troop smear while campaigning for anti-war Democrat gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides yesterday in California. So, where’s the MSM coverage?”
—Kos has a long response. Here are a few edited excerpts:
Kerry responded perfectly. Perhaps not in a way that the DC wise men would approve, those Gang of 500 fools who have enabled this administration’s disasters at home and abroad…..One surprise: just heard Tweety [MSNBC’s Chris Matthews] say flat out that reading the full transcript it’s clear that Kerry was insulting the president, not the troops. Dick Armey was on at the time and essentially agreed and laughed about how funny it was that the GOP was feigning mock outrage. Ha ha. Ha ha. Funny funny GOP.
If Republicans want to debate who supports the troops more, let’s have that debate. I’d love to talk about nothing else than Iraq for the next week. And for the rest of you who think this is the end of the world — stop being afraid of your own shadow. Just stop it. Fight or get out of the kitchen. It will get hotter than even this.
—Citizen Smash has a bunch of quotes on this issue and adds about Kerry:”Another Baby Boomer who just can’t move beyond Vietnam.”
—Red State: “Me thinks the lady doth protest too much. Could he be waking up to the fact that through his false and self-serving “support” of our armed forces, he may well have just lost the Democrats a second campaign in a row?”
That came out the wrong way. We all know, unfourtunately in some ways, that people who usually don’t go to school either work straight out of high school or go in military. Then again, you don’t get stuck in Iraq automatically if you don’t do well. As of now and until there is a draft, the military is a choice and a very brave and courageous one. He could of worded his statement a little differently….I’m tired of ultra-conservative redneck hacks too, Sen. Kerry. However, I still would have chosen some better words.
—Wizbang:
However, it isn’t just your [Kerry’s] comments that are so repugnant. Your statement above is also unbelievable. Not only did you first insult our brave troops in Iraq, but after you were caught on video saying such extraordinary words, you then used the US military again by hiding behind it in order to deflect the criticism that is rightfully coming down on you like a ton of bricks.
Any presidential aspirations you may have had are over, Senator Kerry. Your hateful words about our military men and women will haunt you for the rest of your political career, if not the rest of your life.
—zjohnson84: “In case you hadn’t heard, John Kerry is an idiot for either bashing the troops or inadvertently bashing the troops by fumbling a joke. Damn you, John Kerry. This is crunch time, and if you wreck this election for me I’m gonna Swiftboat your ass.”
—Chris:
Whoever does the speech writing for John Kerry should be fired. Check that–shouldn’t work ever again in any kind of political field. I’m hoping that John did this all on his own with no help from anyone…. Of any of the Democrats that shouldn’t be talking at the present time the top candidate is John Kerry. I think Howard Dean, Chairman of the DNC, should have paid to send Kerry on a two week vacation until after elections. SERIOUSLY!!!!
Again, I wish Kerry had not made the remark (or phrased it better), but really, it changes nothing. The Republican party has no plan for Iraq other than rhetorical shifts, their policies are not constructed or implemented to actually accomplish anything but rather to maintain Congressional power, and we all will be better off if the GOP is swept out of power. The Republicans are corrupt, morally bankrupt, have no ideas, no principles, and are hoping upon hope that this latest distraction will help to stop the bleeding. Unfortunately, the bleeding they care about is at the polls and not the bleeding in Iraq.
—Powerline: “John Kerry is now outdoing Al Gore when it comes to loser derangement syndrome. And Kerry doesn’t even have the excuse of having almost won the presidency….I am truly grateful that John Kerry will never be president of the United States.”
Somewhere deep within the bowels of the whitehouse Karl Rove has awakened laughing the full on sinister supervillian. The Republican were a bunch of whipped dogs resigned to their fact ,then Kerry goes and implies that all the service men and women serving in Iraq are uneducated dolts. As Richard Nixon said to David Frost about Watergate “in the end I gave my enemies everything they needed to destroy me” . John Kerry is done. A pariah in the democratic party , all hope of a second run for the whitehouse dashed. He still doesn’t get it , why he lost and why he just is NOT presidential material. At Least Al Gore understands his defeat and learned from it, further efforts in politics are not unthinkable. Keryy He still thinks the problem is not with him but with other people…elitist snobbery does not work well outside Masschusetts (or maybe Conn.)
—Don Surber: “Kerry made a stupid remark in the heat of a political campaign. Why does he not just admit it, apologize and move on? He should be smarter than this.”
Whether or not the comment was directed toward the troops or President Bush, a couple of things impacted me about the Kerry Press conference. One; it is about time the Senator showed he’s still “got a pair�. Two; if I take his statements literally, it appears a vote for Senator Kerry in 2008 is a vote for stepped up warfighting in Iraq with more boots on the ground, which of course; I now firmly oppose. As for Afghanistan, it’s an interesting twist for a highly visible Democrat to sling the “cut and run� label at the Republicans.
For the most part though, I think this may just be the first time I have ever listened to the Senator elitist from Massachusetts and felt a compelling interest to lean forward and listen to what the man had to say. When FoxNews commentators are picking on the Democratic Senator for not acting very “Presidential�, you know he got their attention.
–A big roundup at Pajamas Media.
—Mahablog: “Kerry is not a candidate for anything right now, but that isn’t stopping the Bushies from bubbling over in fake outrage to fire up the base against the evil Democrats. Because, you know, if one Democrat says something (that he didn’t actually say), all Democrats must think exactly the same way.”
—Roger Simon: “It’s kind of amazing he was so dumb as not to apologize quickly…No, it’s not-ed. This guy was not exactly at the top of his class at Yale. No, he wasn’t. Will this latest Kerry fiasco rescue the Republican Party from a debacle next Tuesday? It just might help, if the Repubs can keep it in the news a few days (and Kerry certainly helped by refusing to apologize). But the Repubs don’t really deserve rescue. This is an election in which both parties deserve to lose.”
The Democrats need to come across as confident and unflustered and save the recriminations and navel-gazing until after the election. This story is likely to dominate at least one more news cycle, but if the Democrats start sniping at each other or treating Kerry like a leper, the story will only gain more traction. If they haven’t been asked already, every Democrat in a contested race is going to be asked tomorrow whether or not they stand by Kerry and his comments.
…Unfortunately, getting Democrats all on the same page is almost impossible. A number of Democratic candidates will be very tempted tomorrow to publicly distance themselves from Kerry. If they succumb to that temptation, this story will gain steam. I’d like to think that a story this trivial and inane couldn’t influence the outcome of the election, but given the current dismal state of our political discourse, nothing would surprise me.
The relationship between liberals and troop morale is usually a two-step process. Liberal Democrats through their tireless rhetoric reduce public support for a war effort. Lower public morale, in turn, reduces troop morale, especially in the age of internet and instant access to news cycles. Lower troop morale reduces battlefield performance, meaning more troops die as a result of liberal rhetoric.
In this case John Kerry skipped the first step. He bypassed the public to take a cheap shot directly at our American troops themselves. The message from Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry, who carried the mantle for all Democrats just two years ago, is that anyone wearing the uniform of the Unites States of America is uneducated. Troops are dumb, according to John Kerry. Where do Democrat candidates in hotly contested races stand on this notion? With Kerry or with the President?
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.