Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
p0ink
New member
Kerry's Inaccurate Statements on Meet the Press
George W. Bush ^ | April 19, 2004
CUBA
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed That He Never “Suggested Lifting” The Cuban Embargo. KERRY: “Now, I met with members of that community. All through the years I've been in the Senate, for 20 years, Tim. I have never suggested lifting the embargo. I don't suggest you just lift the embargo. That's not what I'm talking about. But for anybody to suggest that what we've been doing has worked, that it has somehow--I mean, look what happened with the Vallera program recently. A whole bunch of people got arrested and put in jail.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
Sen. Kerry Has Long Voted Against Stronger Cuba Sanctions. (H.R. 927, CQ Vote #489, Motion Rejected 59-36: R 50-2; D 9-34, 10/17/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 955, CQ Vote #183: Rejected 38-61: R 5-49; D 33-12, 7/17/97, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1234, CQ Vote #189, Motion Agreed To 55-43: R 43-10; D 12-33, 6/30/99, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2549, CQ Vote #137: Motion Agreed To 59-41: R 52-3; D 7-38, 6/20/00, Kerry Voted Nay)
In 2000, Sen. Kerry Said Florida Politics Is Only Reason Cuba Sanctions Still In Place. “Senator John F. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview that a reevaluation of relations with Cuba was ‘way overdue.’ ‘We have a frozen, stalemated, counterproductive policy that is not in humanitarian interests nor in our larger credibility interest in the region,’ Kerry said. … ‘There is just a complete and total contradiction between the way we deal with China, the way we dealt with Russia, the way we have been dealing with Cuba over the last [several] years. It speaks volumes about the problems in the current American electoral process. … The only reason we don’t reevaluate the policy is the politics of Florida.’” (John Donnelly, “Policy Review Likely On Cuba,” The Boston Globe, 4/9/00)
CAFE STANDARDS
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Said He Is Flexible On Miles Per Gallon Standard That His Own CAFE Legislation Proposed. RUSSERT: “That was your legislation. You stand by that.” KERRY: “Well, we tried to do that that year but both McCain and I said at the time, you can go back and look at the quote -- we said we're not fixed in stone as to the number or how we do this. We're ready to negotiate. The problem is nobody wanted to negotiate because they had the votes.” (NBC's "Meet The Press," 4/18/04)
The Truth:
In 2002, Kerry Proposed His Own Legislation To Increase Fuel Efficiency Standards For Automobiles To 35 Miles Per Gallon. Kerry sponsored failed legislation that would have required automakers to boost Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2013. (S.1926, Introduced 2/8/02; Peter Cohn and John Godfrey, "Another Committee Loses Voice On Energy Overhaul," Congressional Quarterly Daily Monitor, 2/12/02)
Kerry Sticking With Plan To Raise CAFE Standards. “In the face of rising gasoline prices and stagnating fuel efficiency, Senator John Kerry is sticking with a plan he backed in the Senate to increase the nation's fuel economy standards 50 percent by 2015. That would be the largest increase, by far, since automotive fuel economy standards were first imposed after the oil shocks of the 1970's.” (Danny Hakim, "Kerry Is Sticking With Plan To Raise Auto Fuel Efficiency," The New York Times, 3/26/04)
Kerry Has Called For Higher CAFE Standards That “Go As Far And Fast As We Can.” “The Senate Commerce Committee is now reviewing the need to raise fuel economy standards for cars and SUVs. The question is: how far and how fast can we go? My answer is that we should go as far and fast as we can, guided by the legitimate concerns of the domestic automobile industry and the limits on what it is technically and economically feasible.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At The Center For National Policy, Washington, DC, 1/22/02)
In 1999 And 2002, Kerry Voted For Increased CAFE Standards. (H.R. 2084, CQ Vote #275: Rejected 40-55: R 6-45; D 34-9; I 0-1, 9/15/99, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 517, CQ Vote #47, Adopted 62-38: R 43-6; D 19-31; I 0-1, 3/13/02, Kerry Voted Nay)
MEANS TESTING
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claims He Has Rejected 1995 Statement For Means Testing Of Social Security. RUSSERT: “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.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
But, In August 2003, Kerry Again Suggested Considering Higher Taxes And Means Testing For Social Security. “[Kerry] told the audience here the country should consider raising Social Security taxes on incomes above $86,000 or capping the retirement benefits paid to wealthy Americans.” (David Yepsen, “Still Time For Kerry - But Hold The Ketchup,” The Des Moines Register, 8/14/03)
And In The Very Same Interview With Tim Russert, Kerry Again Hinted At Means Testing. Columnist Mickey Kaus noted: “Did John Kerry endorse means-testing Social Security--shaving the benefits of the affluent elderly--on Meet the Press today? I think he did! Let’s go to the transcript. Kerry’s just been asked how he’s going to make Social Security solvent. At first Kerry says he’s ‘rejected’ a 1995 statement of his that called for raising the retirement age and means-testing. But then he says: SEN. KERRY: ‘Tim, we’re going to have a bigger economy. We have more Americans who are working. We have the ability to grow out of it. Now, if we don’t do that--let me give you an idea. You and I earn a lot of money. We’re very lucky. If you live to be 85, Tim, do you think it’s right that somebody who earns $30,000 a year after you’ve gotten all your money out of Social Security, after you’ve gotten everything and more than you paid is paying you money? I think there are plenty of ways to look at things. We don’t have to tell Americans it won’t be there, because it will be there. And we certainly don’t have to cut benefits to pay for George Bush’s unaffordable tax cut.’ [Emph. added] Sounds like a modified version of means-testing that would only kick in after rich retirees had gotten their contributions back in the form of benefits.” (Mickey Kaus, “Did Kerry Endorse ‘Means-Testing’?” Slate.com, 4/18/04)
VA BUDGET
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Accused President Bush Of Cutting The VA Budget. “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.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
The President’s FY 2005 Budget Proposes To Increase Funding For The Department Of Veterans Affairs (VA) To $68 Billion From The 2001 Level Of $48 Billion. The past four straight VA budget increases have provided more than a 40% increase in VA health care alone since 2001. (www.omb.gov, accessed 4/19/04)
According To Factcheck.Org, Kerry’s Attacks On Veterans Are False: “Yet even so, funding for veterans is going up twice as fast under Bush as it did under Clinton. And the number of veterans getting health benefits is going up 25% under Bush's budgets. That's hardly a cut.” (“Funding for Veterans up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut,” Factcheck.org, 2/18/04)
KERRY SPENDING
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed His Budget Numbers Add Up And He Will Balance The Budget. RUSSERT: “Senator, if you repeal the top bracket of the Bush tax cut, you get about $50 billion a year.” KERRY: “Actually, you get about--you get more than that, Tim. RUSSERT: “It's pretty close. $200 billion over four years. And if you go through and add up your--if you...” KERRY: “Tim, no, that's wrong. You get about $850 billion over 10 years.” RUSSERT: “It--well, it kicks out later.” KERRY: “Right.” RUSSERT: “But initially, your first four-year term, it's about $50 billion a year. If you go through and add up all the campaign promises you've made, about health care, education, environment, the National Taxpayers Union said it's about $280 billion a year. So if you're saving $50 billion, if you will, in terms of the tax cut...” KERRY: “Yeah.” RUSSERT: “...with new revenues coming, but adding all that new spending...” KERRY: “The National...” RUSSERT: “...you're not going to be able to balance the budget.” KERRY: “Wrong. They--you know, I love these experts in Washington who have an interest, incidentally, and so they skew things the way they try to figure them out. The fact is, they don't take into account savings. They don't take into account the innovative ways I'm going to pay for things.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
An Updated Analysis Of Senator John Kerry’s Campaign Promises Shows They Would Cost At Least $977 Billion Over 5 Years And $1.9 Trillion Over 10 Years. This is new government spending on top of the President’s budget. The costs are only for 44 out of Kerry’s 85 campaign promises. There were not enough details to determine the cost of Kerry’s remaining proposals.
John Kerry's Proposed Tax Increases Would Generate Only $658 Billion In Revenue Over 10 Years, Resulting In A $1.25 Trillion Tax Gap. John Kerry has proposed to raise income, capital gains, and dividend taxes on those making more than $200,000, to modify the repeal of the death tax, and close corporate tax loopholes.
IRAQ
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed He Didn’t Attack The President On Iraq Until U.S. Had Taken Control Over The Country. RUSSERT: “You've been, obviously, extremely critical of President Bush's handling of foreign policy and his role as commander in chief. A year ago in March you made a commitment, and this is what you said. You ‘voted to authorize military action but has accused President Bush of rushing into war, [but he] said he will cease his complaints once the shooting starts. “It's what you owe the troops,' said a statement from Kerry. I remember being one of those guys and reading news reports from home. If America is at war, I won't speak a word without measuring how it will sound to the guys doing the fighting when they're listening to their radios in the desert.’” Are you concerned that you're sending the wrong message to the troops by not showing solidarity in terms of the war in Iraq? And have you broken your pledge?” KERRY: “No, I haven't. Because, number one, I did adhere strictly to that through the period of the success of the war, when we finally had taken control of the country.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
Kerry Attacked The President Before Troops Had Made It To Baghdad And Called For “Regime Change” In The U.S. “‘What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,’ Kerry said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library. Despite pledging two weeks ago to cool his criticism of the administration once war began, Kerry unleashed a barrage of criticism as US troops fought within 25 miles of Baghdad.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Says Us Needs Its Own ‘Regime Change,’” The Boston Globe, 4/3/03)
George W. Bush ^ | April 19, 2004
CUBA
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed That He Never “Suggested Lifting” The Cuban Embargo. KERRY: “Now, I met with members of that community. All through the years I've been in the Senate, for 20 years, Tim. I have never suggested lifting the embargo. I don't suggest you just lift the embargo. That's not what I'm talking about. But for anybody to suggest that what we've been doing has worked, that it has somehow--I mean, look what happened with the Vallera program recently. A whole bunch of people got arrested and put in jail.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
Sen. Kerry Has Long Voted Against Stronger Cuba Sanctions. (H.R. 927, CQ Vote #489, Motion Rejected 59-36: R 50-2; D 9-34, 10/17/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 955, CQ Vote #183: Rejected 38-61: R 5-49; D 33-12, 7/17/97, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1234, CQ Vote #189, Motion Agreed To 55-43: R 43-10; D 12-33, 6/30/99, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2549, CQ Vote #137: Motion Agreed To 59-41: R 52-3; D 7-38, 6/20/00, Kerry Voted Nay)
In 2000, Sen. Kerry Said Florida Politics Is Only Reason Cuba Sanctions Still In Place. “Senator John F. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview that a reevaluation of relations with Cuba was ‘way overdue.’ ‘We have a frozen, stalemated, counterproductive policy that is not in humanitarian interests nor in our larger credibility interest in the region,’ Kerry said. … ‘There is just a complete and total contradiction between the way we deal with China, the way we dealt with Russia, the way we have been dealing with Cuba over the last [several] years. It speaks volumes about the problems in the current American electoral process. … The only reason we don’t reevaluate the policy is the politics of Florida.’” (John Donnelly, “Policy Review Likely On Cuba,” The Boston Globe, 4/9/00)
CAFE STANDARDS
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Said He Is Flexible On Miles Per Gallon Standard That His Own CAFE Legislation Proposed. RUSSERT: “That was your legislation. You stand by that.” KERRY: “Well, we tried to do that that year but both McCain and I said at the time, you can go back and look at the quote -- we said we're not fixed in stone as to the number or how we do this. We're ready to negotiate. The problem is nobody wanted to negotiate because they had the votes.” (NBC's "Meet The Press," 4/18/04)
The Truth:
In 2002, Kerry Proposed His Own Legislation To Increase Fuel Efficiency Standards For Automobiles To 35 Miles Per Gallon. Kerry sponsored failed legislation that would have required automakers to boost Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2013. (S.1926, Introduced 2/8/02; Peter Cohn and John Godfrey, "Another Committee Loses Voice On Energy Overhaul," Congressional Quarterly Daily Monitor, 2/12/02)
Kerry Sticking With Plan To Raise CAFE Standards. “In the face of rising gasoline prices and stagnating fuel efficiency, Senator John Kerry is sticking with a plan he backed in the Senate to increase the nation's fuel economy standards 50 percent by 2015. That would be the largest increase, by far, since automotive fuel economy standards were first imposed after the oil shocks of the 1970's.” (Danny Hakim, "Kerry Is Sticking With Plan To Raise Auto Fuel Efficiency," The New York Times, 3/26/04)
Kerry Has Called For Higher CAFE Standards That “Go As Far And Fast As We Can.” “The Senate Commerce Committee is now reviewing the need to raise fuel economy standards for cars and SUVs. The question is: how far and how fast can we go? My answer is that we should go as far and fast as we can, guided by the legitimate concerns of the domestic automobile industry and the limits on what it is technically and economically feasible.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At The Center For National Policy, Washington, DC, 1/22/02)
In 1999 And 2002, Kerry Voted For Increased CAFE Standards. (H.R. 2084, CQ Vote #275: Rejected 40-55: R 6-45; D 34-9; I 0-1, 9/15/99, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 517, CQ Vote #47, Adopted 62-38: R 43-6; D 19-31; I 0-1, 3/13/02, Kerry Voted Nay)
MEANS TESTING
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claims He Has Rejected 1995 Statement For Means Testing Of Social Security. RUSSERT: “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.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
But, In August 2003, Kerry Again Suggested Considering Higher Taxes And Means Testing For Social Security. “[Kerry] told the audience here the country should consider raising Social Security taxes on incomes above $86,000 or capping the retirement benefits paid to wealthy Americans.” (David Yepsen, “Still Time For Kerry - But Hold The Ketchup,” The Des Moines Register, 8/14/03)
And In The Very Same Interview With Tim Russert, Kerry Again Hinted At Means Testing. Columnist Mickey Kaus noted: “Did John Kerry endorse means-testing Social Security--shaving the benefits of the affluent elderly--on Meet the Press today? I think he did! Let’s go to the transcript. Kerry’s just been asked how he’s going to make Social Security solvent. At first Kerry says he’s ‘rejected’ a 1995 statement of his that called for raising the retirement age and means-testing. But then he says: SEN. KERRY: ‘Tim, we’re going to have a bigger economy. We have more Americans who are working. We have the ability to grow out of it. Now, if we don’t do that--let me give you an idea. You and I earn a lot of money. We’re very lucky. If you live to be 85, Tim, do you think it’s right that somebody who earns $30,000 a year after you’ve gotten all your money out of Social Security, after you’ve gotten everything and more than you paid is paying you money? I think there are plenty of ways to look at things. We don’t have to tell Americans it won’t be there, because it will be there. And we certainly don’t have to cut benefits to pay for George Bush’s unaffordable tax cut.’ [Emph. added] Sounds like a modified version of means-testing that would only kick in after rich retirees had gotten their contributions back in the form of benefits.” (Mickey Kaus, “Did Kerry Endorse ‘Means-Testing’?” Slate.com, 4/18/04)
VA BUDGET
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Accused President Bush Of Cutting The VA Budget. “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.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
The President’s FY 2005 Budget Proposes To Increase Funding For The Department Of Veterans Affairs (VA) To $68 Billion From The 2001 Level Of $48 Billion. The past four straight VA budget increases have provided more than a 40% increase in VA health care alone since 2001. (www.omb.gov, accessed 4/19/04)
According To Factcheck.Org, Kerry’s Attacks On Veterans Are False: “Yet even so, funding for veterans is going up twice as fast under Bush as it did under Clinton. And the number of veterans getting health benefits is going up 25% under Bush's budgets. That's hardly a cut.” (“Funding for Veterans up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut,” Factcheck.org, 2/18/04)
KERRY SPENDING
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed His Budget Numbers Add Up And He Will Balance The Budget. RUSSERT: “Senator, if you repeal the top bracket of the Bush tax cut, you get about $50 billion a year.” KERRY: “Actually, you get about--you get more than that, Tim. RUSSERT: “It's pretty close. $200 billion over four years. And if you go through and add up your--if you...” KERRY: “Tim, no, that's wrong. You get about $850 billion over 10 years.” RUSSERT: “It--well, it kicks out later.” KERRY: “Right.” RUSSERT: “But initially, your first four-year term, it's about $50 billion a year. If you go through and add up all the campaign promises you've made, about health care, education, environment, the National Taxpayers Union said it's about $280 billion a year. So if you're saving $50 billion, if you will, in terms of the tax cut...” KERRY: “Yeah.” RUSSERT: “...with new revenues coming, but adding all that new spending...” KERRY: “The National...” RUSSERT: “...you're not going to be able to balance the budget.” KERRY: “Wrong. They--you know, I love these experts in Washington who have an interest, incidentally, and so they skew things the way they try to figure them out. The fact is, they don't take into account savings. They don't take into account the innovative ways I'm going to pay for things.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
An Updated Analysis Of Senator John Kerry’s Campaign Promises Shows They Would Cost At Least $977 Billion Over 5 Years And $1.9 Trillion Over 10 Years. This is new government spending on top of the President’s budget. The costs are only for 44 out of Kerry’s 85 campaign promises. There were not enough details to determine the cost of Kerry’s remaining proposals.
John Kerry's Proposed Tax Increases Would Generate Only $658 Billion In Revenue Over 10 Years, Resulting In A $1.25 Trillion Tax Gap. John Kerry has proposed to raise income, capital gains, and dividend taxes on those making more than $200,000, to modify the repeal of the death tax, and close corporate tax loopholes.
IRAQ
Kerry Claim:
Kerry Claimed He Didn’t Attack The President On Iraq Until U.S. Had Taken Control Over The Country. RUSSERT: “You've been, obviously, extremely critical of President Bush's handling of foreign policy and his role as commander in chief. A year ago in March you made a commitment, and this is what you said. You ‘voted to authorize military action but has accused President Bush of rushing into war, [but he] said he will cease his complaints once the shooting starts. “It's what you owe the troops,' said a statement from Kerry. I remember being one of those guys and reading news reports from home. If America is at war, I won't speak a word without measuring how it will sound to the guys doing the fighting when they're listening to their radios in the desert.’” Are you concerned that you're sending the wrong message to the troops by not showing solidarity in terms of the war in Iraq? And have you broken your pledge?” KERRY: “No, I haven't. Because, number one, I did adhere strictly to that through the period of the success of the war, when we finally had taken control of the country.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
The Truth:
Kerry Attacked The President Before Troops Had Made It To Baghdad And Called For “Regime Change” In The U.S. “‘What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,’ Kerry said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library. Despite pledging two weeks ago to cool his criticism of the administration once war began, Kerry unleashed a barrage of criticism as US troops fought within 25 miles of Baghdad.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Says Us Needs Its Own ‘Regime Change,’” The Boston Globe, 4/3/03)
"collateral damage"
