No doubt the editors of The News & Observer, who yesterday praised nominee John Kerry’s “broad plan for his presidency” that he presented in his convention speech, would agree with Washington Post columnist William Raspberry in their support for Kerry for president. But Raspberry sees something troubling about Kerry that most conservatives have been saying for months:
What infuriates about Kerry is his wish to be all things to all people — or, at any rate, not to give them any basis for attacking him. He has, as far as I can tell, staked out a single position that might be called controversial — he would repeal the tax cuts for the rich.
But nearly everything else he says or does seems calculated to avoid clear-cut disagreement with people on either side of any issue. Thus he “voted for (the $87 billion supplemental military budget) before I voted against it.” Thus he differs with the president on what he would do to extricate us from Iraq, but has offered no discernible new policy. Thus he parses every statement to the point where even he must wonder what he said. Thus he (to return to his Vietnam War protest days) didn’t return his “medals,” but only the “ribbons” that represent them. And I don’t know what to make of the controversy over his wartime heroism and the Swift boat incident.
But little things become big issues for Kerry because he refuses to stake out positions on the big things. Maybe, with the polls showing him in a virtual dead heat with Bush, he doesn’t want to frighten the “undecideds.” Well, if I were undecided (and, frankly, I would be if Kerry were pitted against Bush I instead of his scary son) I’d find Kerry’s super-carefulness off-putting.
Sounds like Raspberry is looking for that “broad plan” that The N&O editors found so compelling.
