Senator Kerry's Global Test

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
Oct. 4, 2004

SENATOR KERRY'S GLOBAL TEST

Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. President, during last week's Presidential debate, the junior Senator from Massachusetts claimed that he would only use preemptive force to protect the American people if that use of force passed something he called a "global test".

Let me repeat exactly what he said, because it is significant and I think the American people need to hear it again. When asked by moderator James Lehrer if he would use preemptive force, Senator KERRY said:

If and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

I have another test for Senator KERRY. It is called the "defense of America" test. It is very simple. There is only one question on the final exam: Would you, as President of the United States, do whatever it takes to defend the American people from another terrorist attack?

If a President fails this test, Americans could die. Let me repeat that, because this is a very serious matter.

If a President fails this all-important test, Americans could die.

Let's look at Senator KERRY'S record and see how he scores.

By insisting that any preemptive strike America might take must pass a "global test," Senator KERRY would give France, Germany, or the U.N. a veto over America's right to self-defense. The final decision to protect America would be made not in the Oval Office but in foreign capitals. The final decision to protect America would be made not by an elected American President but by an unelected U.N. diplomats.

If America must submit to a "global test" before acting to defend herself, we may lose the best opportunity to take preemptive action while our "global test graders" dither and delay. Our enemies might attack while we await our "global test grade." Terrorists who cut innocents' heads off-gleefully-on camera-won't hesitate to unleash a horrific attack while America waits for its "global test results."

To cover for his global test, last week Senator KERRY claimed he would do a better job defending the homeland than President Bush. This despite the President's tripling of homeland security funding, creation of the Department of Homeland Security, and implementation of the USA PATRIOT Act.

I am more of a football fan than a hockey fan, but let me make this analogy. Of course we want as strong a homeland defense as possible. But ultimately, homeland defense is like the goalie on a hockey team: a last chance to stop the enemy. The only way to win is to go on offense, and by subordinating America's right of preemption, Senator KERRY has put his team in the penalty box.

Now, let's suppose Senator KERRY passes his "global test" and decides to use military force. What kind of military would America have, if he had had his way throughout his 20-year career in this body?

He opposed the B-1 bomber that dropped the bombs to destroy the al-Qaieda training bases and Taliban strongholds in Afghanistan.

He opposed the B-2 bomber that drove Saddam Hussein out of his Iraqi command posts and down a spider hole.

He opposed the F-14D Fighter Aircraft that sent missiles into Tora Bora in the hunt for Osama bin Laden, who Senator KERRY claims to want to find.

He opposed the Apache helicopter that destroyed the Iraqi Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait during the first Persian Gulf war.

He opposed the Patriot Missiles that America sent our NATO allies to block the spreading of the Iron Curtain.

He has opposed for 20 years a missile defense system, which could be the last line of defense were a rogue nation like North Korea ever to launch a nuclear weapon.

In the debate last week, he opposed the bunker-buster weapons that can knock loose the terrorists who hide in caves deep under the Afghan desert.

In 1994, after the first attack on the World Trade Center, he proposed cutting intelligence funding by a whopping $5 billion, and defended his proposal on this very floor by saying, "the madness must end." Most Senators from his own party, including Senator KENNEDY, opposed his proposal.

He has repeatedly voted against pay raises for the troops now in Iraq, choosing instead to boost their morale by telling them they are fighting the "wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time."

He voted against the $87 billion for our troops in Iraq, even though it included body armor for our soldiers. He then claimed this was a "protest" vote. Let me suggest we should never use our troops as pawns for protest.

Now it is time to grade this test. Again, there is only one question. Would you, as President of the United States, do whatever it takes to defend the American people from another terrorist attack?

Judging from the best evidence-the only evidence-we have, Senator KERRY's votes as recorded in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, it is clear he is not ready for the final exam.

A generation ago, Senator KERRY vigorously attacked America for its role in another war. He claims to have moderated his views since then. But this "global test" is strikingly similar to what he said in 1970: "I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations." He hasn't changed. He wants to turn our troops into blue-helmeted human shields.

President Bush is playing offense by taking the fight to the terrorists, where they live, and he supports giving our military and intelligence forces every last tool they need to win the war on terrorism. That is the only way to protect America. Only America has the will and the means to protect America from attack, and only this American Government has the authority to decide how and when. President Bush gets that. Senator Kerry does not.

I yield the floor.