First, the obligatory bitching: where the hell are Nader, Badnarick, et. al? Down with the two-party duopoly!
Kerry’s on about Bush cutting taxes to the rich. Sometimes I suspect I’m the only middle-class person who doesn’t have a problem with this. It seems reasonable to me that the 5% of citizens who pay 50% of all taxes should see the first, and most, relief. Sales taxes hurt the poor far worse than income tax, but I’ve yet to hear either candidate talk about that.
An aside: those who complain about the rich getting tax cuts also see the widening gap between the poorest and the richest as a problem. Again, I don’t see the problem. Without obscenely wealthy people, who can safely blow millions or even billions on projects that may never have a tangible return, we wouldn’t have SpaceShipOne or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Blah blah, flip-flop, didnt flip-flop, yes you did, no I didn’t…
Kerry is right to keep the spotlight on Bin Laden, who Bush has tried to downplay. On the other hand, Bush is right to say it’s not just him we’re after.
Bush’s response to the failure to fully plan and provision for the Iraq war? [paraphrased] “My generals told me they had it covered. It’s their fault”. BZZZT! Wrong answer! Let’s have a little accountability from the Commander-in-Chief, hm?
Kerry’s answer to what he’ll do if UN Sanctions fail to contain Iran is incredibly weak. Half of it is what Bush has done wrong, and the rest is vague hand-waving about getting together with the British, French, and Germans. For what, a round of golf? The question was what happens when international sanctions fail, dumbass.
In fact, Kerry continues to be exasperatingly vague on questions of national security and fighting terrorism. Just as when I heard him a couple weeks ago on NPR, when the interviewer became audibly annoyed at his repeated refusal to simply answer the question, his answers are 90% what Bush has done wrong and 10% vague statements about “diplomacy”. If he really believes that a new president will substantially alter the rest of the world’s willingness to assist us in tangible ways Iraq and elsewhere, he’s badly mis-advised. Bush is not exactly popular, but as various analysts have pointed out, every country which has refused us help of one kind or another has political and economic reasons above and beyond simple dislike for the guy who’s asking. Sure, they’ll be happy to mug for photo-ops with Kerry, but don’t expect any sudden shifts in foreign policy.
Bush is strongest when he talks about how the Europeans view him and his policies. He admits, at least, that his decisions were unpopular, he doesn’t try to hide behind “it depends on who you ask”. And the thing is, on most of the issues of contention he lists, he was right. He was right to refuse to deal with that gangster Arrafat. He was right not to join the ICC. He doesn’t mention it, but he was right to stay out of Kyoto as well. Bush’s willingness to say “it doesn’t matter what you think, America comes first” is his biggest selling point to me, because that’s the president’s job – to represent the interests of the United States. Not to please the world community.
OK, Bush has now put himself on record re: the Draft: “We’re not going to have a draft, period.”
Kerry is right to oppose the way the Patriot Act is being exploited. However things turn out, we need to keep the government’s feet to the fire on that one…
Bush dodges when asked to name three mistakes he’s made. Come on man – show some backbone! On the other hand, he’s smart enough to know that admitting a mistake on national TV, other than facetiously, is political suicide.
*yawn* OK, I give up. I thought I could make it through, but I can’t. Good god, if we could use hot air for power, we could kick our dependence on foreign oil in a heartbeat. Enough of this, I hear my braincells dying…