I basically agree with Nick Confessore that it’s an unhelpful formulation to say that being in favor of spending money means you are strong on defense and being in favor of any kinds of cuts or reforms means you’re soft on defense. Even Don Rumsfeld has pushed for cuts in certain programs and weapons systems, nobody thinks he soft of defense.

However, to say that being for cuts doesn’t automatically mean you’re soft on defense does not in any way mean that Kerry isn’t truly soft on defense. Confessore certainly knows this. Cheney may have wanted military reform to make the military more effective. I think it’s a major stretch to say that Kerry’s positions on foreign and defense policy were ever driven by anything like a desire for a more effective and lethal military. Logic games and word play cannot hide the fact that Kerry is a life long dove and — worse — he used to be proud of being a dove and now he’s “outraged” at the suggestion that he’s anything but a hawk.