Posted on: Monday, September 13, 2004

EDITORIAL
Will the real John Kerry please stand?

To deserve the support of voters in 2004, Democrat John Kerry must give up his cautious, focus-group-driven campaign and decide what he stands for.

A columnist recently suggested that the vitriolic TV ads being run by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which show Kerry testifying against the Vietnam War in 1971, might have the unintended effect of appealing to a new generation of voters by showing a young man "willing to take risks and boldly state his beliefs."

Alas, those young voters won't recognize that passionate advocate in today's version of John Kerry. His campaign is so clearly driven by a desire not to make a fatal mistake that it has yet to stand for anything much.

Kerry makes a good point when he contrasts his nuanced and sometimes changing views with what some would call Bush's stubbornness in clinging to decisions because of their divine provenance.

Lack of clarity

But Kerry makes this virtue a fault, as he lards his stands on issues with calculated escape hatches. He's an antiwar candidate who says he'd cast his pro-war vote the same way today. His beliefs about abortion and gay marriage are fuzzed beyond usefulness.

The only voters Kerry can really be sure of so far are those who would vote for anyone but Bush.

That's not enough, nor should it be enough, to make Kerry president. He should offer more.

Kerry's opportunity lies in boldly painting stark differences between himself and Bush on such obvious issues as:

• Tax cuts and other economic policies. Kerry should re-embrace his Democratic roots to go to bat for the poor and the middle class, whose very livelihoods are under attack, and whose children will be saddled with repaying today's unconscionable deficits.

Use real numbers

So far, Kerry's answer is a proposal that doesn't pencil: To balance the budget and finance national health insurance by raising taxes on those making more than $200,000 a year while lowering taxes for the middle class.

American voters are grownups; they need to hear Kerry's policy minus the fudge.

• Aggressive policies on foreign affairs. The current administration's fixation on Iraq has allowed North Korea and Iran to become nuclear powers. Both are far more dangerous than Saddam Hussein even hoped to be. Iran's connections with terrorist organizations are not speculative, like prewar Iraq's, but open and robust.

Let's be specific

Kerry should tell us, in specific terms, how he intends to deal with Iran, North Korea and the growing threat of nuclear armament in Northeast Asia.

• The war on terrorism. Bush was absolutely right when he said it was impossible to win a war against terrorism. Terrorism is a technique, not a bombable enemy.

Terrorism can only be minimized and controlled, and that can be done only with a worldwide strategy, joined by all of the world's sensible and peaceful nations.

Unfortunately, Kerry attacked Bush for being right, and then Bush reversed himself. Now they're both wrong.

• Kerry has yet to solve an internal contradiction in his stand on the Iraq war, into which Bush has sunk about $200 billion and 1,000 American lives. It's an adventure Kerry vows to continue, even though he says Bush's rationale for it has proved false.

War or no war?

If there's really no reason for this war, shouldn't Kerry instead offer a way to stop the bleeding and bring the troops home? Do we want U.S. troops in Iraq 10 or even 20 years from now, as Republican Sen. John McCain predicts? The nation needs a realistic discussion about where do we go from here.

Kerry must speak to the disastrous erosion of America's international standing; to renew America's commitment, through strength, to restore nonviolence as the preferred conduct in settling disputes; to pledge to build a meaningful response to such seemingly insurmountable tragedies as civil war and starvation, the alarming toll from HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; dictatorship and defeatism in the Third World.

He must acknowledge the threat of global warming and other environmental degradation and make America part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

In short, Kerry must speak for himself and his beliefs in strong, concrete terms if he hopes to succeed.