"I hadn't realized what an impact Reagan had on both the Soviet leadership and the people [of the Eastern bloc], letting them know that we were with them," Kerrey told Joe Klein, New York's top political reporter.
This is pretty disturbing. Only the most cursory (or the most Republican) look at the 1980s would yield such a cut-and-dried picture. Sure, the autocratic regime was evil. But Reagan's phrase was not intended as support for democracy in Eastern Europe, as Kerrey says and as Reagan would have us believe now. There wasn't a chance for democracy then. The Soviets weren't scared into negotiation by Reagan--in fact, his hard line was a setback for detente. Only the Soviet economic implosion, a process decades in the making, would eventually chop the Soviet Union's tentacles into Eastern Europe that had choked off democracy there for so long.
It's strange that Kerrey forgets that "evil empire" was the keynote for the arms buildup in the Reagan years--a buildup which doubled the defense budget in five years and which, incidentally, Kerrey believes was a mistake. Kerrey's antipolitician rhetoric may be charming, but he can seem out of touch.
Kerrey's also a mean-spirited Japan basher, an arch-protectionist and a supporter of massive and terribly inefficient farm subsidies. There's nothing charming about any of this. Despite his touchy-feely reputation, these views are cold, calculated politics designed to get the Gephardt vote and neutralize Harkin. Too bad the U.S. cannot afford to fight a trade war with Japan--not since the American share of world trade has declined by one-third in the last 20 years.
Then there's the litany of Vietnam War-inspired policies. On his pet issue, health care (which Bill Clinton--who focuses on education--is at least as knowledgeable about), Kerrey advocates national health insurance for one major reason: "Government saved my life" in a vets hospital after the war, he told The New Republic and New York.
On flag burning, he first opposed the Supreme Court's sensible 1989 ruling which upheld the right to torch Old Glory (another purely political decision, which played well in Lincoln), and then supported it. Why? Chief Justice William Rehnquist pissed him off when he wrote in his dissent that people during the Vietnam War were defending the flag. Kerrey said he personally was not, and that he had therefore decided that the court was right--the flag was just a symbol.
On the Gulf War, Kerrey did not voice principled foreign policy theories, but personal objections--it would be another Vietnam, and no one should have to get a leg blown off. All this is understandable, but it's not presidential.
Finally, Kerrey told a crowded ARCO Forum a couple weeks ago that he has no urban policy prepared. He lacked specifics on the deficit, crime, housing, drugs, education and everything else that he didn't face in Vietnam.
THE PRESS still loves him, though. He's the perfect foil of most other presidential contenders--he is quick to admit mistakes, doesn't mind being called a political lightweight and tries hard to answer questions honestly. And he's not afraid to stand up and do hoaky things for audiences--the most cited example being his election night a cappella rendition of "And the Band Played 'Waltzing Mathilda,'" a song about a soldier who loses his legs in World War I.
Still, Bob Kerrey has little idea about where the United States is going in 1992. He has great strength of character, but that's about all he has.
Bob Kerrey thought the phrase 'evil empire' was meant to show support for the people of the Eatern Bloc.