John Kerry’s appearance in Natick, MA, sponsored by the Democratic Town Committee (16 June 2007), was an eye-opener into the mediocrity that passes for leadership in America. As the senator walked on the stage, I found myself feeling compassionate. Except for the hairdo, he’s not imposing at all, and he displayed the typical body language of someone feeling nervous and out of place; in the old days, he might have been described as a sad sack.
Kerry was introduced by the Committee Chair as having “made a mistake” when he voted in 2002 to authorize Bush/Cheney to use military force against Iraq. The excuse for this “mistake” is that he was “misled by lies and deceptions.” I have already criticized this notion of mistake and apology. What was interesting yesterday was that the senator depended on his host to make the pitch, apparently hoping to avoid having to talk about it himself. This introduction dissipated my compassion.
The most revealing aspect of Kerry’s presentation was that he repeatedly forgot his “mistake” and “excuse.” For example, he said, “We liberated Iraq”; how can that be if that the invasion was based on lies and deceptions? He said, “Our troops have done their job”; how can that be if the “job” was a lie and a deception? In a number of other instances, Kerry’s comments indicated he is committed to the continuing presence of American military in Iraq. He argued for a “smart war,” and suggested specific troop deployments that would allow American occupation to go forward with less danger to the troops. This latter comment provoked cries of outrage from the audience, including “There is no ‘smart’ war,” and “We don’t want any war,” and “Humanity is committing suicide with war.”
Kerry actually offers two competing explanations for his 2002 vote. One is the “mistake” excuse. That one is unconvincing. Many millions of Americans, including other senators who voted against the authorization of force, knew then what we know now about the lies and deceptions. Kerry can’t pretend he didn’t know what Senator Kennedy knew and what Senator Graham insisted upon: the National Intelligence Estimate Report showed the lies and deceptions. Kerry also can’t hide what he did in relation to his vote, seeking pollster guidance about how his vote would affect his status as a presidential candidate. Kerry’s primary opponent, Ed O’Reilly, who was in the audience yesterday, is challenging Kerry’s vote as not a mistake, but a calculated move.
Kerry offers a second, competing explanation for his vote in 2002: he says the text of the authorization resolution contained language about negotiation, and that his vote in favor of the use of force was also a vote to negotiate first. This explanation completely contradicts the notion of a “mistake,” by suggesting that Kerry was really in support of the actual authorization resolution after all. Which is it? Mistake or intentional participation in the Bush/Cheney scenario? It can’t be both.
As far as I can tell, Kerry is still making mistakes. He referred to “a lack of understanding of what is at stake,” but he doesn’t seem to understand that himself. He spoke of “how important it is to have the moral high ground,” but the only thing he is doing in that way is his attempt to avoid the deep stain of his 2002 vote to allow the invasion. And that isn’t working.
My guess, after sitting through the whole Natick event, is that Kerry is a militarist and an interventionist and that he will continue to support an American military approach to the mid-east (and probably elsewhere), while obfuscating his position in an effort to retain his seat as a senator from Massachusetts. The reactions of the audience at Natick show that many people are seeing through the obfuscation and are ready for a new senator.