Kerry vs. Bush Debate

Hugh Hewitt writes of tonight’s debate,

Overall: Bush gets a big win, by hiting all his messages over and over again. He wins on substance. Biggest mistake by Kerry: “The Global Test.” Sorry, the American voters aren’t interested in passing any global tests. Bush stresses steadfastness and resolve. Kerry firmed up the hard-left vote, but you can’t win on this.

Was Hewitt watching the same debate I was? Kerry came across as very strong — he’s obviously very comfortable in a debate format. Bush, on the other hand, continues to prove that he is a horrible, horrible public speaker.

Remember the Democratic strategy before Kerry’s implosion in August — highlight the things that Bush has done wrong (in their view) and present Kerry as presidential and, therefore, a credible alternative. Kerry accomplished all of that and more tonight, in my opinion (and I can’t stand the guy even after the debate).

Bush is still very beatable, and if Kerry performs as well in the next two debates Bush is going to be in serious trouble.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me the FEC

There’s a famous quote — misattributed to Voltaire — that goes, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” John Kerry and George Bush seem to want to replace that maxim with, “If I don’t like your ad, I’ll whine to the Federal Elections Commission.”

Kerry went from saying “bring it on” in response to questions about his war record to a “please make it stop” complaint with the FEC. Bush isn’t much better, trumpeting his signing of the campaign finance reform law and demanding an end to ads that are outside of that framework.

It’s amusing to see the two men vying for the most powerful elected office in the world running scared from the likes of MoveOn.Org or Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

This is the best we have to choose from?

Democrats and the Death Penalty

To my mind, John Kerry is worst sort of death penalty opponent. For years he’s solidly against capital punishment regardless of the crime, including terrorism. When it becomes politically expedient, however, he’s suddenly pro-capital punishment when it comes to terrorists.

When asked about his “evolving” position on terrorism, Kerry said,

I oppose the death penalty other than in cases of real international and domestic terrorism. We know we have put innocent people to death; 111 innocent people have already been released from death row. As president, I’ll enforce the law but I’ll also have a national moratorium on federal executions until we use DNA evidence to make sure those on death row are guilty.

Right, because of course it would be impossible to make a mistake and wrongly put to death someone convicted of a terrorist act. Not. It’s obvious, for example, that Tim McVeigh was guilty of the terrorist attack on the Oklahoma City Federal Building, but nonetheless his trial was marred by serious instances of FBI misconduct.

Apparently juries are faulty except when they’re considering terrorist cases, in which case this problem is just swept away.

And, of course, DNA evidence may exonerate some individuals but it cannot with certainty establish guilt as Kerry implies. Though, as I’ve pointed out before, this is one of the inevitable misunderstandings that will lead to DNA evidence being used as an argument in favor of the death penalty.

In writing the Democratic National Committee’s platform, the platform committee took the easy way out — they simply eliminated any mention of capital punishment at all. The previous three DNC platforms, by contrast, had strong pro-death penalty language. Dukakis was the last anti-death penalty presidential candidate and Carter the last anti-death penalty president.

This is not, by the way, the first time that Kerry has altered his death penalty views to bend with the political winds. Kerry has called for a moratorium on the federal death penalty and advocated for giving defendants access to more resources to prove their innocence.

But in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, Kerry voted for the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. That law placed a number of new obstacles in the path of death row inmates trying to appeal their sentence, including limiting such convicts to just a single habeas corpus appeal.