Most Americans understand and support our country's long tradition of international leadership and collective security.
-snip-
Most of the major presidential candidates have met this crucial condition. But the one outlier is the front-runner, Howard Dean.
Gov. Dean's foreign policy speech in Los Angeles got more attention than others for two reasons. First, it was telegraphed by his campaign as evidence of his repositioning as a "centrist" on foreign policy. And second, it contained the deeply unfortunate assertion that Saddam Hussein's capture by U.S. troops did not make America safer. That line was not just another trademark "off-message" ad-lib by Dean, since one of the speech's key weaknesses was a glaring disconnect between his defiant defense of his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his efforts to make it clear he supports the use of force to defend America's interests elsewhere in the world.
-snip-
That's not the only disconnect in Dean's speech. . .
-snip-
But there's no central vision or architecture holding these proposals together. Dean called the war on terrorism his central preoccupation, but spoke of terrorism, rogue states, and weapons of mass destruction as abstractions, not as real threats emerging from specific people and places.
-snip-
That's why John Kerry was justified in charging that Dean espouses a "'Simon Says' foreign policy where America only moves if others move first." And that's why Joe Lieberman was justified in arguing that "Governor Dean has made a series of dubious judgments and irresponsible statements in this campaign that together signal he would in fact take us back to the days when we Democrats were not trusted to defend America's security."
The most succinct line this week about what America needs to protect and advance its interests and values -- and what Democrats should stand for -- came not from a presidential candidate, but from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY): "We need a tough-minded, muscular foreign and defense policy, one that not only respects our allies and seeks new friends as it strikes at known enemies, but which is understood and supported by a majority of the American people."
That's also a good prescription for the message Democrats must embrace to win the argument with George W. Bush on foreign policy and national security in 2004.
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252271&kaid=131&subid=192