LETTERS III: KERRY'S TACTICS?

Last week, in reaction to this post, Josh Chafetz (Oxblog) wrote me to reiterate his criticism of Kerry's campaign appearance with Max Cleland last week:

You write, "As far as I can tell, none of the candidates are refraining from discussing policy altogether. We know pretty much what any of the Democratic candidates would do with respect to Iraq..." Sure, but I would argue that someone's political record is at least as important as campaign promises they make on the stump. What I think is slimy about what Kerry did is that he tried to frame the debate in such a way as to claim that (perfectly legitimate) questions about his record were actually (illegitimate) questions about his patriotism or his Vietnam service. Sure, every candidate tries to frame the issues in the way that makes him look best, and that, in itself, is neither surprising nor slimy. But trying to take an issue off the table entirely by associating any discussion of it with a discussion of something inappropriate ... well, that, it seems to me, is slimy.