here's the ad here're the facts (and i love the bob kerrey bit...it's so, nuanced, hinging on a single "e": http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=241 -- Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings Bush says Kerry missed 76% of public hearings. He could have missed even more. August 17, 2004 Modified:August 17, 2004 Summary A Bush-Cheney '04 ad released Aug. 13 accuses Kerry of being absent for 76% of the Senate Intelligence Committee's public hearings during the time he served there. The Kerry campaign calls the ad "misleading," so we checked, and Bush is right. Official records show Kerry not present for at least 76% of public hearings held during his eight years on the panel, and possibly 78% (the record of one hearing is ambiguous). Kerry points out that most meetings of the Intelligence Committee are closed and attendance records of those meetings aren't public, hinting that his attendance might have been better at the non-public proceedings. But Kerry could ask that his attendance records be made public, and hasn't. Aides also claimed repeatedly that Kerry had been vice chairman of the intelligence committee, but that was Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, not John Kerry. Analysis Kerry often touts his eight years on the Senate Intelligence Committee as a prime qualification for office. The Bush ad takes that on, describing Kerry as a no-show for most of the committee's public meetings. If anything, the ad understates Kerry's lack of attendance. Bush - Cheney '04 Ad "Intel" Announcer: John Kerry promises... Kerry: I will immediately reform the intelligence system. Announcer: Oh really...as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee Senator Kerry was absent for 76 percent of the committee's public hearings. In the year after the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, Kerry was absent for every single one. That same year he proposed slashing America's intelligence budget by 6 billion dollars. There's what Kerry says and then there's what Kerry does. Public Hearings The Bush ad shows Kerry promising to "immediately reform the intelligence system," then counters with an announcer saying "as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee Kerry was absent for 76 percent of the committee's public hearings." As support for that statement, the Bush campaign states that Kerry is listed as present at only 11 of the 49 public meetings of the committee while he was a member, from 1993 through January, 2001, when Kerry left the committee. FactCheck.org examined the official, published records of those hearings. And indeed, Kerry is listed as attending only 11 of those hearings. Kerry's apparent absence from 38 of the hearings actually figures out to an absentee rate of 77.6%. However, the Bush ad's lower figure plays it safe -- giving Kerry credit for attending one hearing for which the record is a bit ambiguous. The record of that hearing, on June 22, 1999, lacks the usual list of the senators and staff members who attended. We checked the full transcript for any sign that Kerry had been there, and found no record of Kerry speaking, or anyone else noting his presence. If Kerry is counted as absent from that hearing as well as the others, he missed nearly 78%. But if he attended and didn't speak, then he would have missed only 37 of the 49, for a no-show rate of 75.5%, which the ad properly rounds up to 76%. In a rebuttal to the ad, the Kerry camp accused Bush of "fuzzy math and bad stats," saying "They rely only on whether Sen... Kerry made statements in one of a small number of open hearings." That's not true. Records list senators and staff members as being present whether or not they spoke, and -- to repeat -- the 76 percent figure actually gives Kerry credit for attending one hearing for which there's no evidence of his participation. What About the Closed Meetings? The Kerry rebuttal also noted that most of the Intelligence Committee meetings are closed and attendance figures for closed meetings aren't public, which is true. But Kerry offered nothing to show that his attendance at closed meetings was better or worse than his attendance at open hearings. He also has passed up a chance to have the full record of his attendance made public. Over the weekend, the Republican chairman of the committee, Pat Roberts of Kansas, refused to say how often Kerry had attended closed meetings. But Roberts said Kerry could, if he wished, ask that his attendance at closed meetings be made public. Roberts spoke on NBC's "Meet the Press" Aug 15: Q: Did he (Kerry) attend private sessions or was he not present? Sen... Roberts: Well, I'm not going to get into whether he was there or not. Senator (Jay) Rockefeller (the Democratic Vice chairman of the committee) and I and the committee would have to agree to release the attendance records for... Q: Well, it should be a matter of record, though, if you can... Roberts: Well, it's in a closed hearing. . . . The easiest way out of this is for John Kerry and John Edwards to request of Senator Rockefeller and myself to release the attendance hearings; not only the public hearings, which they have rebutted, but the closed hearings. . . . Q: Well, has he been a hard-working member? Roberts: They should request it. They should... Q: Because that's one of the credentials he cites in his campaign. Roberts: Well, hard-working member is in the eyes of the beholder. I'm just saying that John Kerry and John Edwards could ask Jay and myself to release the attendance records. It is important because you have to be in attendance to learn the job. A Kerry campaign official responded to Roberts statement by saying "there's nothing to clear up" through releasing records of closed hearings. Stephanie Cutter, communications director of the Kerry campaign, said Aug 15 on CNN's Inside Politics Sunday: Cutter: Well, there's nothing to clear up. . . . John Kerry has had a consistent record of improving intelligence over the past 20 years. He joined with many Republicans, including one of the chairs of the Republican campaign, Arlen Specter, to improve intelligence in a post-Cold War era. So this is -- this is just another distorted attack by George Bush, because he can't defend his own record. As of 6:30pm Aug. 17 the Kerry campaign had made no request of the Senate Intelligence Committee to release records of the closed meetings, a committee spokesman told FactCheck.org. "Vice Chairman?" Oops! In their eagerness to dismiss the Bush ad's charges, Kerry campaign aides claimed that the senator had been vice chairman of the intelligence committee, which isn't true. In fact, former Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska was vice chairman of the panel for several years while Kerry was a more junior member of the panel. John Kerry left the committee in January 2001. He never served as vice chairman, a committee spokesman confirmed to us. The erroneous claim appeared in several places on the Kerry website, one dating back to January, 2004, and another in a posting Aug. 13 to rebut the Bush ad. It said, "Kerry is an Experienced Leader in the Intelligence Field – John Kerry served on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence for eight years and is the former Vice Chairman of the Committee."Kerry senior adviser Tad Devine told Fox News, which first reported the discrepancy, that the campaign would be "happy to correct the record" if needed: Devine: I'll have to check with the issues people. It was my understanding he was. But if that's, you know -- but if that's not a factual case, I'm sure we will be happy to correct the record. Two days later the erroneous claim was still appearing on the Kerry website, however. On Aug. 17 The Associated Press quoted campaign spokesman Michael Meehan conceding the error, adding: "John Kerry, Bob Kerrey -- similar names." Listen Carefully The Bush ad also says Kerry was absent for every single Intelligence Committee meeting during the year "after the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center." That's true. The official records list four public hearings in 1994 -- the year after terrorists set off a truck bomb in the Trade Center's underground garage -- and Kerry is listed as attending none of them. However, those who don't listen carefully to the exact wording of the ad might get the impression that Kerry skipped Intelligence Committee hearings even after the second terrorist attacks -- on September 11, 2001. That would create a false impression. In fact, Kerry left the committee months before the 9/11 attacks. The ad also says Kerry "proposed slashing America's intelligence budget by 6 billion dollars," but fails to mention that figure was spread over six years. It would have represented a 3.7% cut in overall intelligence spending, estimated then at $27 billion per year. Kerry's proposal was part of a large deficit-reduction package that was defeated soundly. For further details on that, see our earlier article on Bush's charge last March that Kerry tried to "gut" intelligence spending.
no they aren't stupid attacks, if you don't judge someone by their actions, dedication to the jobs they are given, then how do you judge them? GWB and Kerry are both awful choices for pres
Agreed. I just know that another 4 years of GWB will be significantly worse than 4 years of Kerry, especially with a GOP controlled Congress. I don't believe that either this idiotic charge against Kerry nor the rantings about GWBs "vacations" indicate anything whatsoever about their "dedication to the jobs they are given."
I worked harder at McDonnalds than these guys do running our country I'll never know what happened behind the scenes, and who actually got what done... but showing up for work is something Bush and Kerry Still, you call it an attack, and I must think about that b/c I've never seen such partisianship in the media... or maybe I'm just too young to remember the old days....?
Kerry would make a good president. GWB has proven that he is not up to the task and will likely go down in history as the worst president of my lifetime. On leadership ability alone, this is a very lopsided election. As an aside, doesn't it bother you conservatives that GWB is only running attack ads? GWB can't run on his record or his vision. But he can spend $200+ million on attack ads. Actions define the man.
I couldn't disagree more you guys just dismiss the whole "Flip flopping" issue I'm not stupid, and I am paying attention, and the only thing consistant I hear from him is what he thinks I want to hear... I can do this and that better!!!!! Andymoon- You've spent a lot of time fighting with posters and defending Kerry... my mind is open... show me where Kerry went to bat for something... dug in and held his ground.... if it's there He'll probably get my vote Bush, I know where he stands, but I'm also pretty sure he's the dumbest man to ever lead this country
If you were to put all of the Senate and House under this kind of scrutiny, I'm sure you find that this is probably normal of most politicians. We are talking about the same Congress that passed the Patriot Act without even reading it. As for the flip flop accusations, it is a non-issue with me. At least when you take 18 years of service and look for contradictions. Times and minds change over that many years. How about comparing Bush and Kerry's flip flops over only the last 4 years? I wonder who would win?
Here's something from his Senate career... http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.sirota.html Then of course, there is opposition to the Vietnam War, which as we can see today, is not popular in some circles. His first job out of law school was as a prosecutor and he put away some bigwig organized crime guys... not duty for the faint of heart. He also lobbied for rape counseling programs, not exactly a sure-fire political winner in the 1970's.
Exactly. Watch C-Span for a few days and you'll see that there are usually the Chair, the Ranking Minority Member, and a few others on any particular committee hearing. Also, it's not clear to me if what they are talking about is the meetings of the Committee as a whole or every subcommittee meeting as well. it is unusual for members of a Committee to attend subcommittee meetings when they are not part of that subcommittee. By the way, I find it hilarious that the Repubs want to make an issue of attendance, given Bush's vacations and Guard problems.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0921192.html Kerry's Senate career has focused on investigations and oversight rather than legislation. As a freshman senator, he secured a seat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His 1986 investigation into charges that the Reagan administration was illegally sending aid to Nicaragua's contras helped lay the groundwork for the Iran-contra investigations. He also spearheaded the investigation of Panamanian general Manuel Noriega's drug trafficking and money-laundering through the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. In 1991, he served as chairman of a Senate Select Committee that investigated Vietnam POWs and MIAs, a highly emotional issue and thankless task, as many POW/MIA groups understandably did not want to put the issue to rest. In 1995, these efforts helped lead to the normalization of relations with Vietnam.
To be honest, it is not the past that is causing me to vote for Kerry, but the future. I believe in Kerry's vision for the War on Terror, namely that we need to fund the intelligence services so that they can identify terrorist cells worldwide. Once we have that information, Kerry plans to use covert special ops guys to take the f***ers out.
