I think John Kerry did a fine job on Meet the Press yesterday. It was a particularly strong appearance when contrasted with Bush’s unpersuasive press conference from earlier in the week.
Unlike the president, Kerry came across as competent and knowledgeable on a wide variety of foreign and domestic issues. He dodged a few questions — in particular, on the Cuba embargo — but did so fairly artfully. And for some reason, Kerry was unusually tan for a New Englander. But I digress.
There were two points that jumped out at me. One showed Kerry beating Russert at his own game, the other was something Kerry needs to be careful about in the future.
“And what the Republicans are doing is one of their craven, misleading, distorting ads, spending millions of dollars trying to suggest I’m not strong on defense. I’m not going to let these Republicans, not for one instant, ever accuse me, who’s voted for 16 out of 19 biggest defense bills in our history, who has supported our troops, while they’re cutting even the VA budget.”
This, by and large, is a strong answer on an important topic. And I don’t mean to quibble too much, but the “16 out of 19 biggest defense bills” line needs to go.
If Bush is attacking Kerry on defense, Kerry has a hundred appropriate responses. By any reasonable measure, the Bush administration has been a disaster of historic proportions for national defense and use of the military. But Kerry highlighting his votes on 16 of 19 defense bills doesn’t resonate with anyone unfamiliar with the legislative process. Most people don’t understand what defense bills Kerry’s talking about, nor why they matter. Kerry may be right on the substance, but there are much more forceful and persuasive ways to make this point.
But perhaps I’m being picky. Kerry was great, meanwhile, playing Russert’s “gotcha” game.
Russert: We always have a lot of spending programs which will be offset by savings, and many of those savings don’t materialize. One program we know is going to cost money, Social Security and Medicare. There are now 40 million Americans on those programs. There’s soon to be 80 million. The trustees of Social Security told us this, that if the programs remain in their current form, we’re going to have to either cut benefits by a third or double the payroll tax from 7.5 percent to 15 percent for the average wage earner. Back in 1995, you said we have to be bold. And it might be unpopular, but we should consider raising the retirement age and means testing. Do you stand by those statements?
Kerry: No, I rejected that. We looked at that and we found that we don’t have to do it. 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.
Along comes George Bush. We have a downturn in the economy, an increase in expenditures for the military, and a big, big, big tax cut we can’t afford. And all of a sudden, you look worse for Social Security and Medicare. I’m going to put us back on the track that we were in the 1990s. We said we were going to save Social Security first, and we had the ability to do it, without doing all these terrible things that you’re saying. I’m not going to do those. I’m not going to cut Social Security benefits. I’m not going to extend the retirement age. And we’re not going to have to raise the premiums. We can fix Social Security beginning with a stronger economy.
Russert clearly wasn’t accustomed to candidates using his words against him; it’s always the other way around. Amazingly, there was no follow-up.
Kerry 1, Russert 0.