Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Analysis of Zell Miller's distortion

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
sithknight Donating Member (85 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:44 PM
Original message
Analysis of Zell Miller's distortion
Taken from the Annenberg school:
Miller didn't say that Kerry voted against the weapons on the list he rattled off, only that he opposed them. And indeed Kerry did, in 1984, as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for Senate from Massachusetts.

All the weapons cited by Miller are listed in a memo from the 1984 Kerry campaign, which we posted along with our Feb. 26 article on Republican distortions of Kerry's defense record. In that 1984 memo Kerry called for "cancellation" of the very weapons Miller cited.

Kerry the Senator

Once elected, however, Kerry's voting record evolved. He did cast votes more than a decade ago against the B-2 Stealth Bomber in 1989, 1991 and 1992. But by 1992 even President Bush (the current incumbent's father) was calling for cancellation of the B-2 and promising to cut military spending by 30% in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was no secret -- Bush did that in his 1992 State of the Union address. But Miller left out that little detail.

Miller did avoid some earlier Republican excesses, as when Miller's fellow Georgia senator, Republican Saxby Chambliss, told reporters on Feb. 21 in a Bush campaign conference call with reporters that Kerry had a "a 32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems." Since Kerry has only been in Congress for just under 20 years, the Chambliss statement was an impossibility. Republicans have also accused Kerry of voting against more mainstream weapons including the M-1 Abrams tank and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, but have been unable to cite any specific votes against those weapons. The best they can do is point to occasional votes Kerry cast against the entire Pentagon budget, which hardly constitutes opposition to any specific weapon.

Kerry voted against the entire Pentagon appropriations bills in 1990 and 1995. Kerry also voted against the Pentagon authorization bills (which provide authority to spend but not the actual money) in those years and also in 1996 . However, he hasn't opposed an annual Pentagon appropriation since then, nor did he do so in 16 of his 19 years in office. So by the Republicans' own measuring stick, Kerry voted for the weapons they list far more often than he voted against them.

From "Stupid" to "Responsible"

Kerry himself conceded that some of the positions he took 20 years ago were "ill-advised, and I think some of them are stupid in the context of the world we find ourselves in right now and the things that I've learned since then." That was in an interview published in June, 2003 in the Boston Globe. "I mean, you learn as you go in life," Kerry was quoted as saying. He added that his subsequent Senate voting record on defense has been "pretty responsible."

Other Misleading Remarks

Note: This isn't the only misleading claim made at the Republican convention. Miller falsely claimed "Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations," when in fact Kerry has said no such thing.

And New York Gov. George Pataki made a similarly misleading statement Sept. 2 when he implied that Kerry would "just wait for the next attack" before using military force to defend the US.

What Kerry really said -- in his own acceptance speech -- is this: "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." That's the opposite of what Miller said Kerry "made clear."
----
Below is a link to the Annenberg School's website for fact checking. I encourage everyone to use it and read it often. There is also a more detailed explanation of Kerry's voting record in a Feb 26 article there.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=252
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sithknight Donating Member (85 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. ?
Ummm...I hope you're not suggesting that I be booted from the DU here cause the facts are the facts and I ain't spinning to right wing crap here. If you don't believe me then feel free to follow the link and check the Annenberg's sources cause it's all public record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. No, no, no.
Kick means to bring the post up so others can read it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. if only
it worked like that here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. .
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Kick is good. It is a compliment. The post should be seen by more people
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. Good post
"bump" and "kick" mean the same thing. It moves the post up so folks see it on the first page. This forum moves a post up to the top each time it's replied to.

Welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baby_bear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. Thanks and welcome to DU
I didn't know about that web page before. I really appreciate you bringing it to our attention.

:hi:
s_m
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC