New Republic Endorses Kerry

The New Republic, big surprise, endorses Kerry.

[Bush] pledged to defeat Islamist totalitarianism the same way we defeated European totalitarianism, by spreading democracy. For a publication that has long believed in the marriage of liberalism and American power, this was the right analysis. And its correctness mattered more than the limitations of the man from which it came.

Three years later, it has become tragically clear that the two cannot be separated.

. . .

On domestic policy, Bush has been Newt Gingrich without the candor. Like Gingrich, he envisions stripping away many of the welfare-state protections that shield economically vulnerable Americans from the vagaries of the free market (while insulating corporations ever more from those same forces). But, rather than explicitly opposing popular government programs, as Gingrich did, Bush has pursued a more duplicitous strategy: He is eviscerating the government’s ability to pay for them.

. . .

By contrast, John Kerry has a record of fiscal honesty and responsibility that continues the tradition of Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin. Unlike most Democrats, he supported the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit-reduction plan. Unlike most Republicans, he supported Clinton’s 1993 deficit-reduction package. And, unlike President Bush, he supports the “pay as you go” rules that, in the 1990s, helped produce a budget surplus.

It is true that, in this campaign, Kerry has proposed more spending than his partial repeal of the Bush tax cut will fund. But he has also said that, if the repeal does not bring in enough revenue, he will scale back his proposals. In fact, one of the virtues of Kerry’s health plan is that, unlike Clinton’s, it can easily be broken down into modest reforms. Even if Kerry merely makes good on his pledge to dramatically expand Medicaid and schip, programs that offer health coverage to poor children and adults, he will have done more to help struggling Americans than Bush has in his four years.

. . .

The Bush administration’s misguided tendency to see Al Qaeda as the instrument of rogue governments made it more willing to use force against Iraq but less willing to use force in Afghanistan after the Taliban fell. Kerry, by contrast, seems inclined to use American power where it could genuinely damage Al Qaeda. Even during the Democratic primaries, he attacked the Bush administration for not sending U.S. troops into Tora Bora to destroy Al Qaeda and Taliban remnants in the waning days of the Afghan war. He has proposed doubling U.S. Special Forces for operations just like that. And he has proposed strengthening America’s capacity to act — including even militarily — to prevent nuclear proliferation, an issue on which the Bush administration has proved astonishingly passive.

Kerry’s apparent willingness to act within states is particularly important because the U.N.’s obsession with sovereignty renders it impotent in such circumstances. His support for the Kosovo war, waged without U.N. approval, is encouraging in this regard, as is his openness to using U.S. troops — presumably without the Security Council’s blessing — in Darfur, Sudan. These encouraging signs counterbalance his worrying tendency to describe multilateralism — and U.N. support — as an end in itself rather than instrument of American power. If elected, this tension will likely be a theme of his presidency, as it was of Clinton’s.

Works for me.

5 thoughts on “New Republic Endorses Kerry

  1. Pingback: The Tin Man » Old TNR Endorsements

  2. I don’t believe an Osama capture would play that well. The time for that would be just before the home stretch, not actually in the midst of it — too early and the bounce would have time to dissipate, but too late and it would look like an obvious, clumsy fix. Kerry could accuse them of dirty tricks in the same press conference he uses to hail the capture.

  3. You’d have to remind everybody who Osama is. They’ve been brainwashed by the press into believing that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.

    Actually I’m surprised a neo-fascist rag like The New Republic isn’t supporting Bush.

Comments are closed.