April 27, 2004

QUOTABLES:

“With the air gushing out of John Kerry's balloon, it may be only a matter of time until political insiders in Washington face the dread reality that the junior senator from Massachusetts doesn't have what it takes to win and has got to go.” – writes James Ridgeway of The Village Voice. (4/27/2004)

Regarding Kerry throwing his medals:

"He only pretended to throw his," Karen Hughes said in a CNN interview. "Now, I can understand if, out of conscience, you take a principled stand, and you would decide that you were so opposed to this that you would actually throw your medals. But to pretend to do so — I think that's very revealing."

JUST POLITICS

Kerry’s medals

Sen. John Kerry’s medals story continued to play for the third day. The Kerry website has changed the message on it to reflect the fact that Kerry only threw away his ribbons and not his medals.

Kerry reconciles his conflicting claims that he threw away his war ribbons and/or medals because, he said, "I think to this day that there is no distinction between the two."

Part of Kerry’s problem is his continued conflicting stories. "I never ever implied that I did" throw away the medals, he told the Los Angeles Times just last week. But, this is not true. Kerry himself said that he threw away more than his Bronze Star, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts in a frequently aired videotape of a 1971 TV show, "Viewpoints."

Former Bush White House communications director Karen Hughes criticized Kerry for leading anti-war protests after he returned from the battlefield on Sunday’s talk show.

Following that Kerry said "If George Bush wants to ask me questions about that through his surrogates, he owes America an explanation about whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it. That's what we ought to have," Kerry told NBC News in an interview, Monday. "I'm not going to stand around and let them play games."

"He only pretended to throw his," Hughes said in a CNN interview. "Now, I can understand if, out of conscience, you take a principled stand, and you would decide that you were so opposed to this that you would actually throw your medals. But to pretend to do so — I think that's very revealing."

Also revealing is Kerry’s inability to have any control over his message or campaign. The Kerry campaign continues to argue that his service in Vietnam is the only credential necessary to prove that Kerry will make a good Commander in Chief.

Meanwhile Vice President Dick Cheney took after Kerry for his record.

"Had the decision belonged to Senator Kerry, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today in Iraq," Cheney said. "In fact, Saddam Hussein would almost certainly still be in control of Kuwait as well."

"I don't think Americans want to see the vice president of the United States at a time of war taking cheap partisan shots," Kerry spokesman David Wade responded to Cheney’s statements.

Cheney’s attack also brought out accusations against Cheney by Democrat National Chairman Terry McAuliffe, "He (Cheney) tried to cut 81 major weapons programs, many of those weapons we are using today in Iraq. He tried to get rid of 500,000 active duty personnel, 200,000 reservists. He tried to close 70 bases."

MoveOn.org to the rescue

Senator John Kerry has a friend in unregulated PACs and MoveOn.org is one of his biggest. The organization has sent out an email appeal for its latest ad defending Kerry:

Dear MoveOn member,

In 2000, the Bush camp ran a vicious "whisper campaign" which questioned whether John McCain was mentally stable after his service as a Vietnam POW.¹ In 2002, Bush surrogates ran a TV ad against Max Cleland, a Democratic Senator who lost three limbs in Vietnam, that attacked Cleland's patriotism and faded his face into Osama bin Laden's.²

Now, the Republican National Committee and the Bush/Cheney campaign are pushing a story that John Kerry was not injured badly enough in Vietnam to deserve one of his three Purple Hearts. Given the gaping holes in Bush's own record of service, the attack is absurd. But if the Bush campaign wants to raise this debate, we're happy to oblige.

Today, we're launching a new 60-second ad that compares Kerry's record of courageous service in Vietnam with Bush's early departure from the National Guard. The ad concludes: "This election is about character. It's between John Kerry, who left no man behind… and George W. Bush, who simply left." This is the first ad since the launch of our 50 for the Future campaign, and we need your help to get it on the air.

Watch the ad and contribute now at:
https://www.moveonpac.org/donate/warrecord.html?id=2729-3383857-WLs52IO6yTtDBzAcHrJn.A

Recently released military documents from both camps highlight the differences between the two men. George Bush, then in the National Guard, checked a box "do not volunteer for overseas."³ Then he failed to show up for a required physical, was grounded from flying, and didn't show up for several months before leaving eight months early for Harvard Business School.⁴

In contrast, in a letter to his Navy personnel officer, Kerry wrote "I request duty in Vietnam."⁵ Over the course of that service, for "brave action, bold initiative and unwavering devotion to duty,"⁶ he was awarded the Bronze Star and Silver Star medals. He also earned not one but three Purple Hearts, for being injured in service to our country.⁷

As the Associated Press reported, "Throughout his four years of active duty, Kerry's superiors gave him glowing evaluations . . . narrative comments from his commanding officers said he was diplomatic, charismatic, decisive and well-liked by his men. . . He was recommended for early promotion, and when he left the Navy in 1970 to run for Congress, his commanding officer said it was the Navy's loss."⁸

But unless we set the record straight, Republicans may actually succeed in misleading the public about Kerry's courageous service and deflecting the huge questions that remain about their own candidate's service. Take a look at our ad comparing the two men, and then help us get it on the air:
https://www.moveonpac.org/donate/warrecord.html?id=2729-3383857-WLs52IO6yTtDBzAcHrJn.A

George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove have a long history of attacking their opponents' military service -- even though Bush left early, Cheney said he had "other priorities" than serving, and Rove didn't serve at all.⁹ If we fight back together, we can demonstrate how outrageous and hypocritical these attacks are -- and make them stop.

Sincerely,
--Adam, Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Laura, and Wes
The MoveOn PAC team

Bush campaign new ad

Bush-Cheney ’04 today announced the campaign’s newest television ad, entitled "Weapons." The ad highlights John Kerry’s troubling record of opposing weapons systems essential to fighting and winning the War on Terror. The ad will run on national cable and in selected local markets. Nine other versions of the ad, specific to selected states, will also air. The script for the ad and supporting documentation are attached.

SCRIPT FOR "WEAPONS"

President Bush:
I’m George W. Bush and I approve this message.

VO:
As our troops defend America in the War on Terror, they must have what it takes to win.

Yet, John Kerry has repeatedly opposed weapons vital to winning the War on Terror: Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Patriot Missiles, B-2 Stealth Bombers, F-18 Fighter Jets and more.

Kerry even voted against body armor for our troops on the front line of the War on Terror.

John Kerry’s record on national security: Troubling.