July 30, 2004

LIKE A PTSD PSA:

Senator John Kerry's Remarks to the Democratic National Convention (7/29/04)

[...] We have it in our power to change the world again. But only if we're true to our ideals – and that starts by telling the truth to the American people. That is my first pledge to you tonight. As President, I will restore trust and credibility to the White House.

I ask you to judge me by my record: As a young prosecutor, I fought for victim's rights and made prosecuting violence against women a priority. When I came to the Senate, I broke with many in my own party to vote for a balanced budget, because I thought it was the right thing to do. I fought to put a 100,000 cops on the street.

And then I reached across the aisle to work with John McCain, to find the truth about our POW's and missing in action, and to finally make peace with Vietnam.

I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war. I will have a Vice President who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws. I will have a Secretary of Defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders. And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States.

My fellow Americans, this is the most important election of our lifetime. The stakes are high. We are a nation at war – a global war on terror against an enemy unlike any we have ever known before. And here at home, wages are falling, health care costs are rising, and our great middle class is shrinking. People are working weekends; they're working two jobs, three jobs, and they're still not getting ahead.

We're told that outsourcing jobs is good for America. We're told that new jobs that pay $9,000 less than the jobs that have been lost is the best we can do. They say this is the best economy we've ever had. And they say that anyone who thinks otherwise is a pessimist. Well, here is our answer: There is nothing more pessimistic than saying America can't do better.

We can do better and we will. We're the optimists. For us, this is a country of the future. We're the can do people. And let's not forget what we did in the 1990s. We balanced the budget. We paid down the debt. We created 23 million new jobs. We lifted millions out of poverty and we lifted the standard of living for the middle class. We just need to believe in ourselves – and we can do it again.

So tonight, in the city where America's freedom began, only a few blocks from where the sons and daughters of liberty gave birth to our nation – here tonight, on behalf of a new birth of freedom – on behalf of the middle class who deserve a champion, and those struggling to join it who deserve a fair shot – for the brave men and women in uniform who risk their lives every day and the families who pray for their return – for all those who believe our best days are ahead of us – for all of you – with great faith in the American people, I accept your nomination for President of the United States.

I am proud that at my side will be a running mate whose life is the story of the American dream and who's worked every day to make that dream real for all Americans – Senator John Edwards of North Carolina. And his wonderful wife Elizabeth and their family. This son of a mill worker is ready to lead – and next January, Americans will be proud to have a fighter for the middle class to succeed Dick Cheney as Vice President of the United States.

And what can I say about Teresa? She has the strongest moral compass of anyone I know. She's down to earth, nurturing, courageous, wise and smart. She speaks her mind and she speaks the truth, and I love her for that, too. And that's why America will embrace her as the next First Lady of the United States.

For Teresa and me, no matter what the future holds or the past has given us, nothing will ever mean as much as our children. We love them not just for who they are and what they've become, but for being themselves, making us laugh, holding our feet to the fire, and never letting me get away with anything. Thank you, Andre, Alex, Chris, Vanessa, and John.

And in this journey, I am accompanied by an extraordinary band of brothers led by that American hero, a patriot named Max Cleland. Our band of brothers doesn't march together because of who we are as veterans, but because of what we learned as soldiers. We fought for this nation because we loved it and we came back with the deep belief that every day is extra. We may be a little older now, we may be a little grayer, but we still know how to fight for our country.

And standing with us in that fight are those who shared with me the long season of the primary campaign: Carol Moseley Braun, General Wesley Clark, Howard Dean, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Dennis Kucinich, Joe Lieberman and Al Sharpton.

To all of you, I say thank you for teaching me and testing me – but mostly, we say thank you for standing up for our country and giving us the unity to move America forward.

My fellow Americans, the world tonight is very different from the world of four years ago. But I believe the American people are more than equal to the challenge.

Remember the hours after September 11th, when we came together as one to answer the attack against our homeland. We drew strength when our firefighters ran up the stairs and risked their lives, so that others might live. When rescuers rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon. When the men and women of Flight 93 sacrificed themselves to save our nation's Capitol. When flags were hanging from front porches all across America, and strangers became friends. It was the worst day we have ever seen, but it brought out the best in all of us.

I am proud that after September 11th all our people rallied to President Bush's call for unity to meet the danger. There were no Democrats. There were no Republicans. There were only Americans. How we wish it had stayed that way.

Now I know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities – and I do – because some issues just aren't all that simple. Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn't make it so. Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn’t make it so. And proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn't make it so.

As President, I will ask hard questions and demand hard evidence. I will immediately reform the intelligence system – so policy is guided by facts, and facts are never distorted by politics. And as President, I will bring back this nation's time-honored tradition: the United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to.

I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can't tell friend from foe. I know what they go through when they're out on patrol at night and they don't know what's coming around the next bend. I know what it's like to write letters home telling your family that everything's all right when you're not sure that's true.

As President, I will wage this war with the lessons I learned in war. Before you go to battle, you have to be able to look a parent in the eye and truthfully say: "I tried everything possible to avoid sending your son or daughter into harm's way. But we had no choice. We had to protect the American people, fundamental American values from a threat that was real and imminent." So lesson one, this is the only justification for going to war.

And on my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: You will never be asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace.

I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a President who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

Here is the reality: that won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership -- so we don't have to go it alone in the world.

And we need to rebuild our alliances, so we can get the terrorists before they get us.

I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

We will add 40,000 active duty troops – not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives – and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists.

To all who serve in our armed forces today, I say, help is on the way.

As President, I will fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. We will deploy every tool in our arsenal: our economic as well as our military might; our principles as well as our firepower.

In these dangerous days there is a right way and a wrong way to be strong. Strength is more than tough words. After decades of experience in national security, I know the reach of our power and I know the power of our ideals.

We need to make America once again a beacon in the world. We need to be looked up to and not just feared.

We need to lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation – to keep the most dangerous weapons in the world out of the most dangerous hands in the world.

We need a strong military and we need to lead strong alliances. And then, with confidence and determination, we will be able to tell the terrorists: You will lose and we will win. The future doesn't belong to fear; it belongs to freedom.

And the front lines of this battle are not just far away – they're right here on our shores, at our airports, and potentially in any town or city. Today, our national security begins with homeland security. The 9-11 Commission has given us a path to follow, endorsed by Democrats, Republicans, and the 9-11 families. As President, I will not evade or equivocate; I will immediately implement the recommendations of that commission. We shouldn't be letting ninety-five percent of container ships come into our ports without ever being physically inspected. We shouldn't be leaving our nuclear and chemical plants without enough protection. And we shouldn't be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America.

And tonight, we have an important message for those who question the patriotism of Americans who offer a better direction for our country. Before wrapping themselves in the flag and shutting their eyes and ears to the truth, they should remember what America is really all about. They should remember the great idea of freedom for which so many have given their lives. Our purpose now is to reclaim democracy itself. We are here to affirm that when Americans stand up and speak their minds and say America can do better, that is not a challenge to patriotism; it is the heart and soul of patriotism.

You see that flag up there. We call her Old Glory. The stars and stripes forever. I fought under that flag, as did so many of you here and all across our country. That flag flew from the gun turret right behind my head. It was shot through and through and tattered, but it never ceased to wave in the wind. It draped the caskets of men I served with and friends I grew up with. For us, that flag is the most powerful symbol of who we are and what we believe in. Our strength. Our diversity. Our love of country. All that makes America both great and good.

That flag doesn't belong to any president. It doesn't belong to any ideology and it doesn't belong to any political party. It belongs to all the American people.

My fellow citizens, elections are about choices. And choices are about values. In the end, it's not just policies and programs that matter; the president who sits at that desk must be guided by principle.

For four years, we've heard a lot of talk about values. But values spoken without actions taken are just slogans. Values are not just words. They're what we live by. They're about the causes we champion and the people we fight for. And it is time for those who talk about family values to start valuing families.

You don't value families by kicking kids out of after school programs and taking cops off our streets, so that Enron can get another tax break.

We believe in the family value of caring for our children and protecting the neighborhoods where they walk and play.

And that is the choice in this election.

You don't value families by denying real prescription drug coverage to seniors, so big drug companies can get another windfall.

We believe in the family value expressed in one of the oldest Commandments: "Honor thy father and thy mother." As President, I will not privatize Social Security. I will not cut benefits. And together, we will make sure that senior citizens never have to cut their pills in half because they can't afford life-saving medicine.

And that is the choice in this election.

You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service, if you deny veterans health care, or if you tell middle class families to wait for a tax cut, so that the wealthiest among us can get even more.

We believe in the value of doing what's right for everyone in the American family.

And that is the choice in this election.

We believe that what matters most is not narrow appeals masquerading as values, but the shared values that show the true face of America. Not narrow appeals that divide us, but shared values that unite us. Family and faith. Hard work and responsibility. Opportunity for all – so that every child, every parent, every worker has an equal shot at living up to their God-given potential.

What does it mean in America today when Dave McCune, a steel worker I met in Canton, Ohio, saw his job sent overseas and the equipment in his factory literally unbolted, crated up, and shipped thousands of miles away along with that job? What does it mean when workers I've met had to train their foreign replacements?

America can do better. So tonight we say: help is on the way.

What does it mean when Mary Ann Knowles, a woman with breast cancer I met in New Hampshire, had to keep working day after day right through her chemotherapy, no matter how sick she felt, because she was terrified of losing her family's health insurance.

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when Deborah Kromins from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania works and saves all her life only to find out that her pension has disappeared into thin air – and the executive who looted it has bailed out on a golden parachute?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when twenty five percent of the children in Harlem have asthma because of air pollution?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when people are huddled in blankets in the cold, sleeping in Lafayette Park on the doorstep of the White House itself – and the number of families living in poverty has risen by three million in the last four years?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

And so we come here tonight to ask: Where is the conscience of our country?

I'll tell you where it is: it's in rural and small town America; it's in urban neighborhoods and suburban main streets; it's alive in the people I've met in every part of this land. It's bursting in the hearts of Americans who are determined to give our country back its values and its truth.

We value jobs that pay you more not less than you earned before. We value jobs where, when you put in a week's work, you can actually pay your bills, provide for your children, and lift up the quality of your life. We value an America where the middle class is not being squeezed, but doing better.

So here is our economic plan to build a stronger America:

First, new incentives to revitalize manufacturing.

Second, investment in technology and innovation that will create the good-paying jobs of the future.

Third, close the tax loopholes that reward companies for shipping our jobs overseas. Instead, we will reward companies that create and keep good paying jobs where they belong – in the good old U.S.A.

We value an America that exports products, not jobs – and we believe American workers should never have to subsidize the loss of their own job.

Next, we will trade and compete in the world. But our plan calls for a fair playing field – because if you give the American worker a fair playing field, there's nobody in the world the American worker can't compete against.

And we're going to return to fiscal responsibility because it is the foundation of our economic strength. Our plan will cut the deficit in half in four years by ending tax giveaways that are nothing more than corporate welfare – and will make government live by the rule that every family has to follow: pay as you go.

And let me tell you what we won't do: we won't raise taxes on the middle class. You've heard a lot of false charges about this in recent months. So let me say straight out what I will do as President: I will cut middle class taxes. I will reduce the tax burden on small business. And I will roll back the tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals who make over $200,000 a year, so we can invest in job creation, health care and education.

Our education plan for a stronger America sets high standards and demands accountability from parents, teachers, and schools. It provides for smaller class sizes and treats teachers like the professionals they are. And it gives a tax credit to families for each and every year of college.

When I was a prosecutor, I met young kids who were in trouble, abandoned by adults. And as President, I am determined that we stop being a nation content to spend $50,000 a year to keep a young person in prison for the rest of their life – when we could invest $10,000 to give them Head Start, Early Start, Smart Start, the best possible start in life.

And we value health care that's affordable and accessible for all Americans.

Since 2000, four million people have lost their health insurance. Millions more are struggling to afford it.

You know what's happening. Your premiums, your co-payments, your deductibles have all gone through the roof.

Our health care plan for a stronger America cracks down on the waste, greed, and abuse in our health care system and will save families up to $1,000 a year on their premiums. You'll get to pick your own doctor – and patients and doctors, not insurance company bureaucrats, will make medical decisions. Under our plan, Medicare will negotiate lower drug prices for seniors. And all Americans will be able to buy less expensive prescription drugs from countries like Canada.

The story of people struggling for health care is the story of so many Americans. But you know what, it's not the story of senators and members of Congress. Because we give ourselves great health care and you get the bill. Well, I'm here to say, your family's health care is just as important as any politician's in Washington, D.C.

And when I'm President, America will stop being the only advanced nation in the world which fails to understand that health care is not a privilege for the wealthy, the connected, and the elected – it is a right for all Americans.

We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil. What does it mean for our economy and our national security when we only have three percent of the world's oil reserves, yet we rely on foreign countries for fifty-three percent of what we consume?

I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation – not the Saudi royal family.

And our energy plan for a stronger America will invest in new technologies and alternative fuels and the cars of the future -- so that no young American in uniform will ever be held hostage to our dependence on oil from the Middle East.

I've told you about our plans for the economy, for education, for health care, for energy independence. I want you to know more about them. So now I'm going to say something that Franklin Roosevelt could never have said in his acceptance speech: go to johnkerry.com.

I want to address these next words directly to President George W. Bush: In the weeks ahead, let's be optimists, not just opponents. Let's build unity in the American family, not angry division. Let's honor this nation's diversity; let's respect one another; and let's never misuse for political purposes the most precious document in American history, the Constitution of the United States.

My friends, the high road may be harder, but it leads to a better place. And that's why Republicans and Democrats must make this election a contest of big ideas, not small-minded attacks. This is our time to reject the kind of politics calculated to divide race from race, group from group, region from region. Maybe some just see us divided into red states and blue states, but I see us as one America – red, white, and blue. And when I am President, the government I lead will enlist people of talent, Republicans as well as Democrats, to find the common ground – so that no one who has something to contribute will be left on the sidelines.

And let me say it plainly: in that cause, and in this campaign, we welcome people of faith. America is not us and them. I think of what Ron Reagan said of his father a few weeks ago, and I want to say this to you tonight: I don't wear my own faith on my sleeve. But faith has given me values and hope to live by, from Vietnam to this day, from Sunday to Sunday. I don't want to claim that God is on our side. As Abraham Lincoln told us, I want to pray humbly that we are on God's side. And whatever our faith, one belief should bind us all: The measure of our character is our willingness to give of ourselves for others and for our country.

These aren't Democratic values. These aren't Republican values. They're American values. We believe in them. They're who we are. And if we honor them, if we believe in ourselves, we can build an America that's stronger at home and respected in the world.

So much promise stretches before us. Americans have always reached for the impossible, looked to the next horizon, and asked: What if?

Two young bicycle mechanics from Dayton asked what if this airplane could take off at Kitty Hawk? It did that and changed the world forever. A young president asked what if we could go to the moon in ten years? And now we're exploring the solar system and the stars themselves. A young generation of entrepreneurs asked, what if we could take all the information in a library and put it on a little chip the size of a fingernail? We did and that too changed the world forever.

And now it's our time to ask: What if?

What if we find a breakthrough to cure Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and AIDs? What if we have a president who believes in science, so we can unleash the wonders of discovery like stem cell research to treat illness and save millions of lives?

What if we do what adults should do – and make sure all our children are safe in the afternoons after school? And what if we have a leadership that's as good as the American dream – so that bigotry and hatred never again steal the hope and future of any American?

I learned a lot about these values on that gunboat patrolling the Mekong Delta with young Americans who came from places as different as Iowa and Oregon, Arkansas, Florida and California. No one cared where we went to school. No one cared about our race or our backgrounds. We were literally all in the same boat. We looked out, one for the other – and we still do.

That is the kind of America I will lead as President – an America where we are all in the same boat.

Never has there been a more urgent moment for Americans to step up and define ourselves. I will work my heart out. But, my fellow citizens, the outcome is in your hands more than mine.

It is time to reach for the next dream. It is time to look to the next horizon. For America, the hope is there. The sun is rising. Our best days are still to come.


As a partisan, one inevitably views such things through partisan eyes, but I thought the speech was shockingly weak. To begin with, there was nothing memorable in what he said, no phrase or idea you'll be talking about tomorrow or that the talking heads will feel the need to weigh in on this Sunday. The best he could muster was the salute and the "Reporting for duty," which made him seem a grunt rather than a Commander in Chief.

Second, at this point in his career it's pointless to look for the Senator to relax and connect with people, but the rush in which he delivered the whole speech, the relentless breathlessness, and the sweat, all made him seem kind of frantic. C-SPAN did something clever, showing George W. Bush's speech in 2000 right after the Senator finished--the contrast of the confident, folksy, measured delivery of the President made for a stark contrast with Mr. Kerry's gerbil on crack routine.

Worst of all though, Senator Kerry's speech was incoherent as rhetoric. This may be the unavoidable result of the conflict between his career and his candidacy--and it is said that he wrote much of it himself, so his internal conflicts would be on display--but its various parts just don't fit together at all. In the opening section he gives us the whole song and dance about his patriotic war service and love of country, but never mentions that he made his national reputation by opposing his country and the patriotic war. [Indeed, other than a very brief reference to working with John McCain on POW issues and a few mentions of his brief career as a prosecutor, the John Kerry he presented the nation apparently went straight from Vietnam to Iowa in 2003.] Then while trying to project his strength and commitment to a powerful America he never mentions that he supported the wars that liberated Afghanistan and Iraq, instead making it sound as if he'd withdraw the troops from the latter. He doesn't mention the war he opposed, because he needs to play up having fought in it. Nor does he mention having supported the war we're in, because now he needs to play up opposing it. That may work for folks who know nothing about him, but for anyone else it seems like rats gnawed holes in the speech because he's leaving out so many salient facts.

Then there's the bit about: "as President, I will bring back this nation's time-honored tradition: the United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to." Tradition? What war did we ever have to fight, with the possible exception of the War of 1812?

But the point at which this "I'm a warrior/I'm a pacifist" thing gets truly weird is in the following passage:

I learned a lot about these values on that gunboat patrolling the Mekong Delta with young Americans who came from places as different as Iowa and Oregon, Arkansas, Florida and California. No one cared where we went to school. No one cared about our race or our backgrounds. We were literally all in the same boat. We looked out, one for the other – and we still do.

That is the kind of America I will lead as President – an America where we are all in the same boat.


All of a sudden, he's gone from keeping us out of war to putting us all in some kind of national gunboat on patrol. In his desire to appear the soldier in order to convey strength, but his genuine conviction that our strength should not be used, he's set up a psychic disconnect that puts sections of his message at war with each another.

Finally, as a kind of icing on the badly battered cake, since he hasn't been following any overarching themes, which might give structure to the speech, nor presenting a set of ideas and a plan that he would govern by, when he does periodically drop a specific in it's something that's driven wholly by the politics of the moment, some picayune point that only makes sense to insiders:

* I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States.

* The 9-11 Commission has given us a path to follow, endorsed by Democrats, Republicans, and the 9-11 families. As President, I will not evade or equivocate; I will immediately implement the recommendations of that commission.

* I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation – not the Saudi royal family.

* What if we find a breakthrough to cure Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and AIDs? What if we have a president who believes in science, so we can unleash the wonders of discovery like stem cell research to treat illness and save millions of lives?

There's a dig at Enron in there somewhere too and for folks at the Convention these are the kinds of things they want to hear, but anyone watching at home had to be bewildered: What happened to the Constitution? What did which Commission propose? The Sau'dis; where did they come from? Would stem-cells be in there if Ron Reagan hadn't spoken at the Convention? This is a descent from mumbo-jumbo into trivia.

By all accounts, Mr. Kerry has two tasks he has to succeed in if he's to have a chance at winning this fall: he has to convince a dubious public that they want to see someone with his rather cold and aloof personality on their tv screen at supper every night for the next four years; and he has to explain to a country that rightly fears NorthEastern liberals that his program is different than those of his predecessors on the Democratic Left. A frenzied speech devoid of specifics and obsessed with life in the Mekong Delta 36 years ago can't have helped in either task.

Mr. Kerry seems to assume that this is an election like 1980 and 1992, where the American people are so fed up with the sitting president that any credible alternative will do. The folks in the Boston Garden undoubtedly feel that way, but polls show that President Bush still has about a 50% approval rating. Jimmy Carter, by contrast, hit 21% at one point in 1980. This is not an electorate that has given up on Mr. Bush by any stretch of the imagination. But they might be willing to at least listen to someone who could offer them a bit less tumult than we've had since election day 2000. All Mr. Kerry offered tonight was platitudes delivered by a character out of The Deer Hunter or Coming Home. That's not going to get it done.

MORE:
Missed Opportunity (Washington Post, July 30, 2004)

AL GORE AND George W. Bush accepted their parties' 2000 nominations for the presidency with an optimism fueled by seeming prosperity at home and apparent security in a post-Cold War world. In accepting the Democratic nomination last night, John F. Kerry spoke to a far more anxious America, one that has weathered a recession and, more important, entered what the nominee called "a global war on terror against an enemy unlike we've ever known before." Mr. Kerry therefore sought above all to make the case that he could be trusted to lead a nation at war, and rightly so; he and Mr. Bush must be judged first and foremost on those grounds. But on that basis, though Mr. Kerry spoke confidently and eloquently, his speech was a disappointment.

Mr. Kerry talked movingly of how his combat experience would temper his decision making: "I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can't tell friend from foe." The responsibility of sending troops into danger should weigh on a commander in chief. But so must the responsibility of protecting the nation against a shadowy foe not easily deterred by traditional means. Mr. Kerry last night elided the charged question of whether, as president, he would have gone to war in Iraq. He offered not a word to celebrate the freeing of Afghans from the Taliban, or Iraqis from Saddam Hussein, and not a word about helping either nation toward democracy.

In Iraq, Mr. Kerry said, "We need a president who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden. . . . That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home." But what is "the job"? He didn't say. Mr. Kerry could have spoken the difficult truth that U.S. troops will be needed in Iraq for a long time. He could have reaffirmed his commitment to completing the task of helping build democracy. Instead, he chose words that seemed designed to give the impression that he could engineer a quick and painless exit.


Bush Is Optimistic in New Speech (Nick Anderson, July 29, 2004, LA Times)
In a new campaign speech that presages an August advertising blitz, President Bush asserts that America has "turned the corner" and depicts himself as an incumbent who delivers.

"When it comes to choosing a president, results matter," Bush declares in an excerpt from a speech his campaign disclosed today. The sentence echoes a 2000 campaign slogan that termed Bush a "reformer with results." It is also an implied dig at Democratic nominee John F. Kerry's 19-year record in the Senate, which Republicans call undistinguished.

In another excerpt meant to show Bush's optimism, the president says: "We have turned the corner, and we are not turning back."


-Bush to promote second-term agenda (RON HUTCHESON, 7/29/04, Knight Ridder Newspapers)
Ending a week of self-imposed silence, President Bush on Friday will kick off a monthlong campaign blitz highlighting his plans for a second term.

The burst of activity leading into the Republican convention Aug. 29-Sept. 2 signals Bush's determination to counter any boost that his opponent, John Kerry, gets from this week's Democratic convention. Bush, who followed tradition by keeping a low profile during the Democratic gathering in Boston, will be much more active in coming weeks.

White House and campaign aides said he also would be more explicit about his plans for a second term. One item Bush will highlight is his proposal to overhaul Social Security by giving younger workers the option of investing a portion of their payroll taxes in the stock market.


-Rushed speech, lost opportunity (Thomas Oliphant, July 30, 2004, Boston Globe)
FOR REASONS he might like to explain, John Kerry last night raced through an acceptance speech that was way too long for a time slot he knew about for weeks.

Desperate to stay within the broadcast networks' paltry 60 minutes, Kerry stepped on his best thoughts and lines and blurred important proposals and distinctions, committing the sin of interfering with his own ability to communicate with an electorate eager to learn much more about President Bush's opponent.

At a Democratic convention planned to showcase a candidate and his basic approach to two huge situations -- a bogged-down military adventure in Iraq and a fragile economy -- Kerry obscured his presentation in a blizzard of hard-to-follow verbiage dictated by the clock.

Perhaps the public will let him off the hook, but the fact remains that Kerry essentially blew an opportunity he may not get again until the debates with Bush this fall. He and his advisers can and will argue that the cold facts of economic and foreign policy life will dominate political opinion in the weeks ahead; nevertheless, a golden opportunity slipped away.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 30, 2004 12:00 AM
Comments

I noticed that John Kerry cribbed a GWB theme with "restoring trust and credibility to the White House", a Cheney theme with "help is on the way", and a Carter theme with "a government as good as the American Dream".

Can he not come up with any original slogans of his own?

Posted by: James Haney at July 30, 2004 1:56 AM

Heaven help anyone who thinks stealing from Jimmy Carter is a good idea.

Posted by: John Barrett Jr. at July 30, 2004 2:32 AM

Good analysis Orrin. I can't bear to read it all, it turns to so much noise in the mind after awhile, like listening to a Tele-tubby. This whole warrior/pacifist dual personality syndrome of the democrats is truly frightening. But even more frightening is the total lack of content, or ideas. The democrats are now so detached from reality that they now indulge in magical thinking, as if their good intentions alone will solve the country's problems.

Kerry is an empty suit, an actor preening for a role. Who will be writing his scripts is anyone's guess. He certainly can't write his own.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 30, 2004 3:08 AM

I'm also seriously disappointed. I was sure, especially after the set-up speeches by Messrs. Obama and Edwards, that Mr. Kerry was going to try to position himself to the right of Mr. Bush on the basic issue of the war, presenting himself as the person who could most effectively fight and win it. Instead, in the paragraph he _did_ devote to the war, he got all soupy, if not outright mushy. I think he's jumped the shark.

Posted by: Joe at July 30, 2004 5:32 AM

From Dick Morris's column today:
"Oddly, his absence of biography confirms the impression I formed of him during my White House years: He's a back-bencher. I never can recall a single time that his name came up in any discussion of White House strategy on anything. He was the man who wasn't there. We were always figuring out how to deal with Ted Kennedy or Pat Moynihan or Tom Daschle or Phil Gramm, or Al D'Amato or Bob Dole or Jesse Helms or Orin Hatch or Joe Biden. But nobody every asked about John Kerry.

He wasn't much there then, and he's not much there now. Only now he wants us to trust him to be president."
Exactly.

Posted by: AWW at July 30, 2004 7:25 AM

There isn't enough money to get me to watch the speech, but I did flip to ABC at the end. You all must be wrong because Peter Jennings and George Stephanapolous thought it was a great speech.

Posted by: David Cohen at July 30, 2004 7:40 AM

In a new campaign speech that presages an August advertising blitz, President Bush asserts that America has "turned the corner" and depicts himself as an incumbent who delivers.

Of course, Judd readers already knew that the campaign begins on 15 August, when Karen Hughes officially rejoins it. And judging from the convention that just took place, the campaign's strategy looks ever more sound.

Posted by: kevin whited at July 30, 2004 8:24 AM

Here's the section I thought was the most interesting, in terms of the war on terror:

I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

OK, so a Kerry Administration would stand up to Jacques Chirac about U.S. sovergnty, but the sentence before it appears to say he'll defend that right when the U.S. is attacked again. Big whoop -- if they U.S. is attacked again in any way, shape or form similar to 9/11, Kerry would be impeached if he then allowed France or any other U.N. country to hold a veto over our military action.

The question Kerry still needs to answer is if he would use the U.S. military in a pre-emptive fashion to lower the risk of a future 9/11. Edwards mentioned Iraq and Syria in his speech, and North Korea's name has been bandied about, but the Democrats still have not spelled out a policy on what a Kerry Administration would do with those states between the time it would take office and the time some major attack on the U.S. occurs.

This is basically a "feel bad to feel good" strategy. Sure the next time we use our military there may be thousands more American citizens dead, but if we wait until after we're attacked, we'll regain the moral high ground and the French and Germans will love us, even as we send Special Forces off to attack those responsible. This may make liberals feel better about themselves, but for the places that get hit and the people who get killed before that happens, it's a strategy that has a few flaws in it.

Posted by: John at July 30, 2004 8:54 AM

Imus is (unintentionally) hilarious today, with all the generalities on the speech being superlatives and all the specifics being criticisms.

Posted by: David Cohen at July 30, 2004 8:55 AM

Kevin:

If we ran the GOP I think I'd cut the convention to one day and just let W speak.

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 9:03 AM

He avoided any mention of cultural issues like abortion,"gay marriage" and the selection of judges, but I didn't watch all of the speech or read it that closely.

Would stem cell research be a concession to the abortion rights crowd?

What leapt out at me is that he will wait until we have a reason to go to war which translates into: I will do nothing until thousands are lying dead in the streets and then we will attack. Not the strategy I care for.

And, yes, mentioning Cheney, Ashcroft and the 911 Commission were like shout outs to the party faithful. He shoulda let Ted Kennedy or someone else do a red meat speech using that material. Since most people don't even know who Ashcroft is much less the vp, why bog down your speech with it?

No good theme except "I'm the antithesis of Bush."

It never occurs to these guys that a dual income family, particularily with stock options, 401 ks, etc. that reaching $200k is not an out of reach dream for most Americans. Most people know families in this bracket and it doesn't seem like the impossible dream to get there. Then you hear how little Heinz-Kerry pays in taxes on a huge amount of wealth. They can't see the disconnect.

Posted by: Buttercup at July 30, 2004 9:05 AM

Meaningful moments from a speach I didn't watch except for highlights on ABC presented by a gushing Charlie Gibson:

Hero and American patriot Max Cleland...

President who mislead us into war...

Vice president who met with polluters...

And a few others like: experience in combat, all four months, mostly minor and not worth mentioning other than their negative effect on my psyche.

To be fair, I'm not in the choir he was preaching too and couldn't quite catch all the lyrics.

On the positive side, it appeared a well scripted and delivered mouth music performance ... read act, and the botox looked great. "Hope (Ark) springs eternal" and "Happy times are here again." I must be missing something ... but who cares?

Posted by: genecis at July 30, 2004 9:13 AM

I enjoyed Eric Zorn's comment this morning:

"LET'S STAY ON THE HIGH ROAD, YOU LYING, WARMONGERING PESSIMISTIC ABUSER OF THE CONSTITUTION"

Of course, Eric loved the speech. What I listened to just made me mad he was distorting events when he should have been making his positoin clear.

Maybe that WAS his position: history is malleable.

Posted by: Arnold WIlliams at July 30, 2004 9:20 AM

Here's one I didn't get: he said that he'd only go to war to protect America or its vital interests. Well, as a Senator, he supported sending troops to Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia...how were any of those places vital to our interests? Unless, of course, you feel it's in our interest to defend the powerless and downtrodden....oops, but that would mean we were right to go to Iraq, even without any WMD's, just to get rid of Saddam...

Posted by: Foos at July 30, 2004 9:40 AM

I am curious about the left's idea of the military. Michael Moore with his debate with O'Riely kepts saying "would you send your child (in the military) to Iraq?'. In this speech, Kerry says "I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place ".

Why does the left refer to the military as children?

Posted by: pchuck at July 30, 2004 9:43 AM

This was the part that got me:

I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a President who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

Here is the reality: that won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership -- so we don't have to go it alone in the world.

I translated that as "What we need to do in Iraq is have me be the president." So much for having "a plan."

Posted by: Brandon at July 30, 2004 9:44 AM

Brandon:

That plays off of his assumption that the Bush presidency has failed so spectacularly that all he has to do is be credible as an alternative. They're replaying '80/'92 in a year that shapes up more like '84.

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 9:53 AM

Maybe not '84, but definitely a remake of '96.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at July 30, 2004 10:45 AM

I will give the Democrats some credit. I think everyone was expecting Kerry to do something similar to Edwards, and try to run to Bush's right. But he didn't do that. Instead, he sounded like Howard Dean in a convention where Howard Dean sounded like John Kerry. The convention organizers had tamped down the vigor on everyone else (Sharpton notwithstanding) enough that Kerry looked positively energetic. To the crowd, at least, and they ate it up.

So if that's what they were trying to do, good show. Though it seems like a bad idea. "Ok, Edwards, you talk to the moderates and disaffected Republicans--I'll handle the base."

Shouldn't that be the other way around?

Posted by: Timothy at July 30, 2004 10:50 AM

For all the talk of "missed opportunities" and how this might affect the race, since the convention was only watched by a few million people, mostly partisans, isn't any fallout rather limited ?
It's not as though Kerry's speech was watched or heard by the vast majority of any truly undecided voters living in actual swing states.

Thomas Oliphant wrote that Kerry might get another chance to define himself during the Presidential debates; that, to me, brings back memories of how Gore was going to humble Bush during their debates.
Even the most partisan non-nuts could only bring themselves to score it 2 - 1, advantage Bush. Most people thought Gore didn't win any.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 30, 2004 11:53 AM

pchuck: Moore kept asking O'Reilly if he would "sacrifice" his child to save Fallujah, not send his child. O'Reilly gave a pretty lame response. He should have pointed out that a) as you note, we are sending adults, not children to fight b) they are not being laid out on a pentagon and having their hearts cut out, a helpless victim of sacrifice, rather they are all volunteers who chose to fight c) I would not kill my child to save a foriegn city, would any parent? Honestly, I couldn't "sacrifice" my child to save the millions that died in concentration camps, but the whole question is rather stupid and emotional. But, I would support my adult child's decision to fight on behalf of this country. All O'Reilly could serve up is that he would gladly sacrifice himself.

Which the whole exchange should embarass O'Reilly since Moore is good at creating propaganda pieces where he controls the input and output, but he reeks at reasoned debate.

Posted by: Buttercup at July 30, 2004 12:30 PM

>You all must be wrong because Peter Jennings
>and George Stephanapolous thought it was a
>great speech.

Was this before or after they gushed about how much they wanted to bear his child?

Or before or after the proclamation "The voice of a God and not of a man!"

Posted by: Ken at July 30, 2004 12:32 PM
« DON'T DISTRACT ME WITH THE DEAD: | Main | WHERE WAS JOHN?: »