You had a chance NOTD
Warning: Use of undefined constant template_directory - assumed 'template_directory' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /homepages/10/d87402808/htdocs/backporchbeer/wp-content/themes/andyblue/single.php on line 11

By etrigan - Last updated: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - Save & Share - 10 Comments

“I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it,” “says”:http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/03/17/kerry_blasts_bush_on_protecting_troops/ candidate Kerry.

Apparently funds for the troops in harms’ way falls lower on JFK’s priorities list than taxing the folks who are trying to get rich. (H)e would have supported it if it had been financed by repealing a portion of the tax cuts implemented during the Bush administration.

But we shouldn’t fault Kerry for that: He’s already got his (wife’s) money in the bank). It’s not like income taxes are going to make him sell the shack on Beacon Hill.

(BTW – “You had a chance” is just a reminder that a moderate Democrat running on a platform other than “Always Bash Bush” could have cleaned up with voters like me.)

Posted in Politics • • Top Of Page

10 Responses to “You had a chance NOTD”

Comment from etrigan
Time March 17, 2004 at 5:11 pm

wamwamwam(wait-a-minute wait-a-minute wait-a-minute)

> he would have supported it if it had been financed by repealing a portion of the tax cuts implemented during the Bush administration

So, you think Bush should be spending MORE MONEY increasing the deficit EVEN MORE as long as it was for a good purpose? He was asking to spend money without suggesting how he’d pay for it.

jank- I’d like to borrow $8700. I have no collateral and no increased income to show that I’ll be able to pay for it. …or does that only work if my last name is Bush?

Comment from etrigan
Time March 17, 2004 at 5:14 pm

> “Always Bash Bush”

Is there another presidential candidate we should be bashing? The competition is 1.

I don’t see what I or Kerry is doing as “bashing”. It is simply highlighting all the reasons I see why Bush is not a good president and should not remain in office. Not every argument is a “10” but I can stack up enough “1”s to show why conservatives, liberals and moderates alike should see this guy is worthless.

Comment from Jank
Time March 17, 2004 at 5:32 pm

JRO – a more apt analogy would be you asking to borrow about $4K, assuming an average annual income for you and yours of $100K. (87 billion out of a 1993 budget of 2,158 Billion Tables

In any case, if you’re really asking, I’d probably say yes, since I’ve got a track record with you and consider you pretty trustworthy. Much like bond dealers do with US Treasury bonds (How the Government does its deficit spending).

If you want an even more apt analogy, assuming I make $100K, you would be asking to borrow $790. That uses proportionalities with my income being the US’ GDP ($10,986 Billion in 1993). We could consider that traders around the world snap up T-Bills, but I think the analogy has been beat to death.

> stack up enough “1”s

Yep, negative campaining works. Whoop-de-frickin’ doo. So why is it terrible when either side practices it?

Comment from etrigan
Time March 17, 2004 at 7:08 pm

> negative campaining works

I interpret negative campaining as lying (including white lies and misleading generalizations.) So far, I haven’t seen that from the Kerry camp but Bush’s team has come out swinging with two of the slimiest campaign mud-slingers in the business.

Comment from Jank
Time March 18, 2004 at 7:21 am

“I actually did vote for the $87 billion”? isn’t a white lie?

Unnamed leaders endorsing Kerry in contradiction to the constitution isn’t a white lie?

Then there’s the issue of his unsubstantiated claims way back in the ’70s to have seen US troops commit atrocities in Vietnam, his refusal to hold North Vietnam accountable for verifying that they had released all US POW’s in the ’80s … The dude hasn’t held a consistient position on any issue other than preventing other Americans from enjoying the priviledges of wealth that he’s gotten from marrying well.

Comment from etrigan
Time March 18, 2004 at 7:49 am

> in contradiction to the constitution

What is the proper procedure for foreign leaders wanting to tell the challenging candidate they support him? Should they arrange a meeting with the sitting POTUS and have him pass the message along? I don’t see where there is any contradiction to the constitution and if there was Kerry would face legal attack. I think you are telling a white lie with that sentence because you are supporting facts not in evidence.

> “I actually did vote for the $87 billion”

He voted for it with an ammendment that explained how to pay for it. He didn’t vote for it when the ‘Pubs pushed on without finding a way to pay for it. (What is up with you cut-tax and spend-anyway Republicans?!?)

> held a consistient position

Hour to hour, day to day every _voting_ politician has changed their stance on almost every particular “issue” based on the ammendments and agreeances made during negotiations. The only reason you can call Bush “consistent” is because during his political career every item that came to his desk was immutable. His only choices were “veto” or “sign”. He never had the opportunity to say “I’ll sign it if…” or “I’ll veto it if…” when his record would be affected.

Comment from Jank
Time March 18, 2004 at 8:23 am

> What is up with you cut-tax and spend-anyway Republicans?

The realization that during economic slowdowns or during moments of national emergency that deficits don’t matter.

I thought of a better analogy while driving home, BTW. Let’s say that you and Becky decide to take a trip down to Corpus for the weekend. On the way home, the old Honda drops an axle, and you’re way the heck in the middle of nowhere, somewhere around Beeville. Are you going to sit down, pull out Quicken and decide how to pay Joe-Bob’s Garage to fix the car, or are you whipping out Mr. Visa and figuring out finances after the problem is solved.

Kerry would have had the soldiers and the citizens of Iraq standing by while he called around to arrange transfers, etc, prior to giving them what they needed to get on with correcting 20+ years of dictatorship.

Comment from etrigan
Time March 18, 2004 at 8:31 am

> deficits don’t matter

I’m sure that the new Democrat POTUS will bail you guys out (again) and balance the budget.

Comment from Jank
Time March 18, 2004 at 8:37 am

> bail you guys out (again) and balance the budget.

Thanks to the economic cycle running behind government economic policy. Well, and the fact that it’ll be another Clinton in office.

Comment from etrigan
Time March 22, 2004 at 8:05 am

> “You had a chance” is just a reminder

btw, I remember saying this very thing about 4 years ago when McCain was kicked to the curb and W was presented as “the man”.

I bet we can both agree that we’d rather have McCain. I would, also, rather have Dean or Clark but I’ll take the lesser of two evils this year since I think the evils of welfare and increased government are out-weighed by the evils of…what’s the opposite of appeasement? trouble-making? war-bringing? picking fights? asking for trouble?

Write a comment

You need to login to post comments!