Kerry on "Meet the Press"
Throughout the blogosphere there's been surprisingly little comment on Kerry's performance on "Press the Meat" on Sunday. I'm not sure why, there's certainly plenty in some of Russert's line of questioning to criticize, and although I didn't see it, Madam Cura did and says Kerry did pretty well. And based on the transcript, I'd have to agree; Kerry was certainly more coherent than was the Miserable Failure when Bush last appeared on the show. Here's a fairly characteristic exchange:
MR. RUSSERT: But the Republicans, Vice President Cheney included, have pointed out to a comment that you made during a Democratic debate which they think undercuts your support of the war on terrorism. "The war on terror is...occasionally military. ... But it's primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: You do not believe the war on terror is primarily a military operation, not a law
enfor...
SEN. KERRY: No...
MR. RUSSERT: You don't.
SEN. KERRY: ...not primarily.
MR. RUSSERT: You don't.
SEN. KERRY: Not primarily.
MR. RUSSERT: You do not.
SEN. KERRY: Not primarily. Tim, Iraq had nothing to do with al-Qaeda. America really needs to stop and focus on the truth again. This administration--and we now know it from Bob Woodward's book. I mean, you can go through the series of events in August when the president was at the ranch taking the longest vacation in presidential history. During that time, the president was talking about Iraq more than he was talking about al-Qaeda. Andy Card came back and made an announcement that they didn't introduce a new product in August because that's not what you do in August. They introduced it in September. They came back and started down the Iraq road. They kept looking for a connection. George Tenet kept saying no connection. The intelligence people said no connection.
MR. RUSSERT: This is the war on terror, Senator.
SEN. KERRY: But let me just finish.
MR. RUSSERT: The war on terror is a law enforcement, not military...
SEN. KERRY: No. I said "primarily." And here's why. If you don't know--if you're going to fight an intelligent war on terror, you don't want to fight it here in America. You do want to fight it abroad. You want to fight it where the cells are originating. And in order to know who they are, where they are, what they're planning and be able to go get them before they get us, you need the best intelligence, best law enforcement cooperation in the world. Now, I've always said once you know where they are, will you use the Delta Force or SEALs or Rangers or Special Forces of some kind? Absolutely. And I will not hesitate to use those forces effectively.
In fact, this administration--I was the one who pointed out they failed to use our forces effectively in Afghanistan. We had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora. Rather than deploy the 10th Mountain Division or the 101st Airborne or the Marines, rather than use the best military in the world to go kill the world's number-one terrorist, what did we do? This administration held them back. They sent the Afghans up into the mountains who a week earlier had been on the other side, and they let him escape.
I think that I can fight a far more effective war on terror. I will build alliances and ooperation. I will make America safer. But I will use our military when necessary, but it is not primarily a military operation. It's an intelligence gathering, law enforcement, public diplomacy effort, and we're putting far more money into the war on the battlefield than we are into the war of ideas. We need to get it straight.
I would have to say -- in my uniquely non-partisan way -- that Kerry got the better of the exchange. As he did here:
But you know what's interesting, Tim--I wish I had the power to press this button and put up on the screen what you said, because back in 1997, on November 9, you sat with Bill Clinton, and what you said to Bill Clinton is--you said, "Mr. President, by the year 2001 Medicare is going to be bankrupt and you're going to have to raise the retirement age. You're going to have to raise the premiums and you're going to have to cut the benefits." That's what you said. Guess what, Tim? He didn't do it. We didn't do it. And we made Medicare whole until the year 2029. We made Social Security whole until 2037.
And Russert missed a beat shortly thereafter when Kerry, after saying he now rejects means testing for Social Security later in the interview suggests that guys like himself and Russert, who probably won't need Social Security, shouldn't receive it. Sounds like means testing to me, but Russert didn't follow up.
All in all, I'd say a pretty good performance. Kerry clearly was prepared and he did a good job at learning the lessons of How to Beat Tim Russert.
But don't take my word for it. If Kerry had stumbled, looked weak or flip-floppery, we sure would have heard about it from Howie Kurtz or Mickey Maus. The latter, in fact, accuses Kerry of "dissembling" regarding releasing his military records, then gets "paranoid," thinking it's a clever strategic move.
MR. RUSSERT: But the Republicans, Vice President Cheney included, have pointed out to a comment that you made during a Democratic debate which they think undercuts your support of the war on terrorism. "The war on terror is...occasionally military. ... But it's primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: You do not believe the war on terror is primarily a military operation, not a law
enfor...
SEN. KERRY: No...
MR. RUSSERT: You don't.
SEN. KERRY: ...not primarily.
MR. RUSSERT: You don't.
SEN. KERRY: Not primarily.
MR. RUSSERT: You do not.
SEN. KERRY: Not primarily. Tim, Iraq had nothing to do with al-Qaeda. America really needs to stop and focus on the truth again. This administration--and we now know it from Bob Woodward's book. I mean, you can go through the series of events in August when the president was at the ranch taking the longest vacation in presidential history. During that time, the president was talking about Iraq more than he was talking about al-Qaeda. Andy Card came back and made an announcement that they didn't introduce a new product in August because that's not what you do in August. They introduced it in September. They came back and started down the Iraq road. They kept looking for a connection. George Tenet kept saying no connection. The intelligence people said no connection.
MR. RUSSERT: This is the war on terror, Senator.
SEN. KERRY: But let me just finish.
MR. RUSSERT: The war on terror is a law enforcement, not military...
SEN. KERRY: No. I said "primarily." And here's why. If you don't know--if you're going to fight an intelligent war on terror, you don't want to fight it here in America. You do want to fight it abroad. You want to fight it where the cells are originating. And in order to know who they are, where they are, what they're planning and be able to go get them before they get us, you need the best intelligence, best law enforcement cooperation in the world. Now, I've always said once you know where they are, will you use the Delta Force or SEALs or Rangers or Special Forces of some kind? Absolutely. And I will not hesitate to use those forces effectively.
In fact, this administration--I was the one who pointed out they failed to use our forces effectively in Afghanistan. We had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora. Rather than deploy the 10th Mountain Division or the 101st Airborne or the Marines, rather than use the best military in the world to go kill the world's number-one terrorist, what did we do? This administration held them back. They sent the Afghans up into the mountains who a week earlier had been on the other side, and they let him escape.
I think that I can fight a far more effective war on terror. I will build alliances and ooperation. I will make America safer. But I will use our military when necessary, but it is not primarily a military operation. It's an intelligence gathering, law enforcement, public diplomacy effort, and we're putting far more money into the war on the battlefield than we are into the war of ideas. We need to get it straight.
I would have to say -- in my uniquely non-partisan way -- that Kerry got the better of the exchange. As he did here:
But you know what's interesting, Tim--I wish I had the power to press this button and put up on the screen what you said, because back in 1997, on November 9, you sat with Bill Clinton, and what you said to Bill Clinton is--you said, "Mr. President, by the year 2001 Medicare is going to be bankrupt and you're going to have to raise the retirement age. You're going to have to raise the premiums and you're going to have to cut the benefits." That's what you said. Guess what, Tim? He didn't do it. We didn't do it. And we made Medicare whole until the year 2029. We made Social Security whole until 2037.
And Russert missed a beat shortly thereafter when Kerry, after saying he now rejects means testing for Social Security later in the interview suggests that guys like himself and Russert, who probably won't need Social Security, shouldn't receive it. Sounds like means testing to me, but Russert didn't follow up.
All in all, I'd say a pretty good performance. Kerry clearly was prepared and he did a good job at learning the lessons of How to Beat Tim Russert.
But don't take my word for it. If Kerry had stumbled, looked weak or flip-floppery, we sure would have heard about it from Howie Kurtz or Mickey Maus. The latter, in fact, accuses Kerry of "dissembling" regarding releasing his military records, then gets "paranoid," thinking it's a clever strategic move.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home