Kerry's Speech--Reactions

[Durandal]

You see nothing in there about eliminating our dependence on foreign oil?

"We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil."

I missed that. I misread it like crazy.

1. Bring in more allies to share burden in Iraq. How? Who's he going to bring in?
2. Lead global effort against nuclear proliferation. How? What's he going to do in order to accomplish that?
3. Add 40,000 active duty troops. How's he going to do that when recruitment is down?
4. End "backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists." Because that goal's going to work great with the third one.
5. Inspect container ships coming into ports. Where's the money for this coming from? Where are his cost/benefit advisors?
6. Better protect nuclear and chemical plants. How's he going to protect them?
7. Invest in technology and innovation to create "good-paying jobs." These are just buzz-words that mean almost nothing, especially since virtually everyone who's qualified to hold a job in genuine research/engineering already has one.
8. "Fair playing field" for American workers to compete in global economy. All this without promoting free trade (see the rest of his speech for details about how much he hates free-trade).
9. Demand accountability from parents, teachers and schools.
10. Cut the deficit in half in four years by ending "tax giveaways that are nothing more than corporate welfare." Need I go on? How's he going to do any of this, much less all of it?

These are all explanations of where he stands on issues. He doesn't explain how (surprise surprise, it's a speech). You're telling me that he didn't say enough about his position on certain issues, when it sounds to me like he told you his position exactly. Are we just misunderstanding each other here? There's a difference between saying, "This is where I stand" and explaining what you're going to do to fight for that stance.

[JME2]

To be perfectly honest, he could have simply said "I am not George Bush" and that would be reason enough to vote for him.

That was of course part of the main purpose for Kerry at the DNC. Many people will vote for him in November, but only because he is the (and religious folk forgive this metaphor) Anti-Bush. The DNC was a chance to get to know him better through the people closest to him and finally, through his final speech.

Did he go into a lot of the tried-and-tested topics of the Clinton years? Yes, he did. But those have been key issues for Dems at the moment. After 4 years of living under the petty reign of the jackass that nobody elected, I for one would like to have another shot at a Trek-esque America.

Dubya's essential fuck-off to the Trek-esque ideals, ideals which I have been watching and seeing in action for the last ten years since I was introduced to Trek and which I most dearly treasure, is the basis of my dislike of the man and the reason why I (and anyone in their right mind) am voting for someone like John Kerry in November.

[JME2]

I also have two more things to add.

1. I practically spit out the mineral water I was drinking when he made the slap at the Saudi Family. I for one want to see how Bush will respond to this one, especially given the talk raised by their connection in Moore's film.

2. Was anyone watching CNN when the Broadcasting glitch hit?

[Durandal]

After 4 years of living under the petty reign of the jackass that nobody elected, I for one would like to have another shot at a Trek-esque America.

Communism?

[SirNitram]

After 4 years of living under the petty reign of the jackass that nobody elected, I for one would like to have another shot at a Trek-esque America.

Communism?

No. Miniskirts.

[JME2]

After 4 years of living under the petty reign of the jackass that nobody elected, I for one would like to have another shot at a Trek-esque America.

Communism?

No. Miniskirts.

Heh.

No, I meant a culture where there is hope for tomorrow, where everyone is treated fairly and equally. Call me naive, but I do believe in a better world -- as long as Bush isn't running it.

[Master of Ossus]

You see nothing in there about eliminating our dependence on foreign oil?

"We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil."

I missed that. I misread it like crazy.

Fair enough.

[snip list]

These are all explanations of where he stands on issues. He doesn't explain how (surprise surprise, it's a speech). You're telling me that he didn't say enough about his position on certain issues, when it sounds to me like he told you his position exactly. Are we just misunderstanding each other here? There's a difference between saying, "This is where I stand" and explaining what you're going to do to fight for that stance.

Maybe, but I'm REALLY concerned by his policies, then. Frankly, I see no legitimate methods through which he can hope to accomplish much of this. Jingoism aside, I'm genuinely concerned because his promises seem so broad that almost no matter how earnest I felt he was, I would still have no faith in his ability to accomplish any of them.

[Darth Wong]

Maybe, but I'm REALLY concerned by his policies, then. Frankly, I see no legitimate methods through which he can hope to accomplish much of this. Jingoism aside, I'm genuinely concerned because his promises seem so broad that almost no matter how earnest I felt he was, I would still have no faith in his ability to accomplish any of them.

He doesn't have to. He only has to NOT implement George Bush's agenda of handing the country over to corporate interests, destroying the wall between church and state, tearing down civil liberties, destroying the environment, and generally being a gigantic buffoon when dealing with other heads of state.

[Master of Ossus]

He doesn't have to. He only has to NOT implement George Bush's agenda of handing the country over to corporate interests, destroying the wall between church and state, tearing down civil liberties, destroying the environment, and generally being a gigantic buffoon when dealing with other heads of state.

I totally disagree with that. It's possible to destroy the country with policies other than George Bush's, and Kerry almost seems bent on doing that. The thing about independence from oil is one of my pet peeves, but he also wants Social Security and Medicare to continue forever (which would literally cost more than the net worth of the US), and frankly his plans of "fiscal responsibility" strike me as being disastrous. I'm seriously looking for a third-party candidate.

[Howedar]

I totally disagree with that. It's possible to destroy the country with policies other than George Bush's, and Kerry almost seems bent on doing that. The thing about independence from oil is one of my pet peeves,

Dubya advocates that too.

but he also wants Social Security and Medicare to continue forever (which would literally cost more than the net worth of the US),

President Bush supports continued Medicare and "Some people like their Social Security exactly the way it is, and they'll be able to keep it exactly the way it is."

and frankly his plans of "fiscal responsibility" strike me as being disastrous. I'm seriously looking for a third-party candidate.

But but but, I thought you didn't know what his plans were?


Maybe you shouldn't vote at all until you become a little more informed on who you're voting for and against.

[Master of Ossus]

I totally disagree with that. It's possible to destroy the country with policies other than George Bush's, and Kerry almost seems bent on doing that. The thing about independence from oil is one of my pet peeves,

Dubya advocates that too.

So what? What does he have to do with Kerry's policy?

but he also wants Social Security and Medicare to continue forever (which would literally cost more than the net worth of the US),

President Bush supports continued Medicare and "Some people like their Social Security exactly the way it is, and they'll be able to keep it exactly the way it is."

Again, what does this have to do with anything?

and frankly his plans of "fiscal responsibility" strike me as being disastrous. I'm seriously looking for a third-party candidate.

But but but, I thought you didn't know what his plans were?


Maybe you shouldn't vote at all until you become a little more informed on who you're voting for and against. [/quote]

WTF are you talking about? Kerry's inability to explain how he's managing to lower middle-class taxes, halve the deficit, increase spending on everything from troops to education to social programs, etc. do not instill me with confidence. Why does that disenfranchise me? Is no one to vote until Kerry explains how he's going to pull this off?

[Marksist]

2. Was anyone watching CNN when the Broadcasting glitch hit?

LOL yes. "What the fuck are you guys doing? We need the God Damned Baloons!" (paraphrasing, but I remember him dropping the F-bomb, and saying God Dammit at one point). I thought that was a pretty funny mess up. And Wolf Blitzer apologizing after.

Also, Master of Ossus, why don't you at least wait to make your decision until the debates, to see if Kerry actually outlines a plan to implement all of his ideas? Also, if you won't wait for the debates, and are stuck on not voting Kerry, then who are you voting for, or are you abstaining?

[LMSx]

You see nothing in there about eliminating our dependence on foreign oil?

"We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil."

I missed that. I misread it like crazy.

That's not as crazy as Kerry makes it seem, since foreign =/ Middle East. It DOES mean he better be damn serious about renewable energy sources, since Russia, South American countries, etc. will have trouble picking up the slack of Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

[LMSx]

Ask and ye shall recieve:

Cate Edwards![/img]

[CJvR]

Ridding the US of it's dependency on Mid-east oil is probably fairly easy. Raise the taxes on gasoline to double or tripple the fuel prices. Perhaps a new generation of cars that give miles/gallon rather than gallons/mile will reduce the dependency on foregin oil.

Naturaly such a promise isn't something you campaign on outside the lunatic green fringe.

[KrauserKrauser]

Maybe, but I'm REALLY concerned by his policies, then. Frankly, I see no legitimate methods through which he can hope to accomplish much of this. Jingoism aside, I'm genuinely concerned because his promises seem so broad that almost no matter how earnest I felt he was, I would still have no faith in his ability to accomplish any of them.

He doesn't have to. He only has to NOT implement George Bush's agenda of handing the country over to corporate interests, destroying the wall between church and state, tearing down civil liberties, destroying the environment, and generally being a gigantic buffoon when dealing with other heads of state.

That's right Mike, instead you'll get hugely increased corporate taxes, absolutely enormous tax increases on anyone earning more than what is considered middle class, more restritctions placed on industry both environmentally and operationally, the signing of the absurd Kyoto Accords, a leader with an absolute distaste for teh advancement of the military, and more wealth reidsitribution than you can shake a stick at. It's not like being "not Bush" makes you good for the country. He's a liberal's liberal that has jack all for respect for free trade, wants the UN to control the US"s military decisions and has the charisma of my left testicle (The right one is the pretty one).

[Chardok]

Krauser. Last night Kerry said he would INREASE the size of the active military. and invest in the LATEST technology to save their lives in combat. As for your other issues, I see nothing wrong with Kerry doing any of those. Corporate taxes? Boo frickity hoo. Taxes on upper class? Boo frickity Hoo. restrictions on polluters? Wah.

[Darth Wong]

Krauser, did you bother reading the Democratic party platform on their website before making that laundry list of longstanding Republican accusations?

[Cairber]

My problems with Kerry's speech:

1) You wont raise taxes for the "Middle Class" but what about the upper middle class? You claim to want to help small businesses yet you talk about people who make 200,000 a year as being in the big bad evil wealthy class. News Flash: there are A LOT of small business owners in the 200,000 range...so you gonna give them trax breaks for their business and raise the taxes for their tax bracket? The 200,000 people are an allusive group...take my fam for example. My father owns small dental business and makes 200,000 a year...BUT...he has 4 kids to support and an elderly mother. I think we need to help the 200,000 bracket, the Upper Middle class is important to us.

2) You are gonna expand special forces...yet...you are a democrat so I doubt with all my sole that you are going to increase military spending. Tell me, how are you going to intice those young men and women expose themselves to hell training and its aftermath without any increased incentives? With that health care you have planned I doubt you can manage a balanced budget if you also increase military spending.

[Durandal]

Ask and ye shall recieve:

Cate Edwards!

I don't recall asking for a broken GeoShitties link.

[Chardok]

My problems with Kerry's speech:

1) You wont raise taxes for the "Middle Class" but what about the upper middle class? You claim to want to help small businesses yet you talk about people who make 200,000 a year as being in the big bad evil wealthy class. News Flash: there are A LOT of small business owners in the 200,000 range...so you gonna give them trax breaks for their business and raise the taxes for their tax bracket? The 200,000 people are an allusive group...take my fam for example. My father owns small dental business and makes 200,000 a year...BUT...he has 4 kids to support and an elderly mother. I think we need to help the 200,000 bracket, the Upper Middle class is important to us.

Child tax credits still apply, and as for the elderly mother, many of her expenses he is footing can potentially be tax deductible. Ask, Ghost Rider, he's the CPA. That's how america works, you see. You CHOOSE to have 4 children, now you gotta support em. Sorry, life sucks get a helmet. I honestly don't think your dad is going to be destitute from a tax increase. Any idea what he paid last year in taxes? I'd wager you guys are more than fairly comfortable.

2) You are gonna expand special forces...yet...you are a democrat so I doubt with all my sole that you are going to increase military spending.

historically, you'd be correct, but you are talking about a veteran democrat. he served in the armed forces and knows what they need to be effective on the battlefield. additionally, he'll be dealing with a republican congress. I'm not worried at all about the military spending.

Tell me, how are you going to intice those young men and women expose themselves to hell training and its aftermath without any increased incentives?

Two words: Hazard pay and increased recruiting. Additionally, If you haven't been in the military, you wouldn't get it. Many soldiers would fall all over themselves trying to get into special forces. It's damned hard to get in now without a letter of recommendation from an 0-6 or above (Not an easy thing to get).

[Illuminatus Primus]

Wow, Look at that Rack; DU is good for something

Better.[/url]

[Cairber]

Its so easy for people just to say because you make 200,000 you have an easy life. I love it.

[Cairber]

And on the military issue, Kerry wouldnt support our troops, along with only 12 other senators, what makes you think he'd give them more incentives now? And hazard pay? My brother is a marine, I cant wait to read him ur little blurb there. I bet he'll run right out and sign up for the SEAL training.

[Cairber]

And if I remember correctly..The only reason my brother and his 5 friends became marines out of the naval academy was so that they could get better pay as systems engineers. I think pay seems to have a lot to do with this..