Can Kerry Beat Bush?

[crawjo]

The New Republic takes a look.

I found this part of the article interesting:

"They would trash him for supporting more than half a trillion dollars in tax increases-including hikes in gas taxes and Social Security taxes on ordinary Americans-while accepting free housing and other goodies for himself from friendly influence-peddlers."

Given all the heated rhetoric about Bush favoring the wealthy with his tax cuts, it won't look good for Kerry if he's got a record of raising taxes on things that affect lower-income Americans.

[GoodSpeak]

Raising taxes my rosey red as-, uh...sorry.


Have you tax bigots checked the cost of living lately? Have you?

It should be PAINFULLY obvious to anyone with even half a brain, that things today just plain cost more to maintain.

Tell me, EXACTLY, where would the money come from to maintain civil services, police, fire, education, highways, EMTs, prisons and our courts if not for taxes? Hm?


Do we "privatize" EVERYthing now?





Blinders ON, bay-bee.

[frankiepop]

well it's like the old mystique disco tune said.....

do u like it like this

push push...in the bush
push push...in the bush
push push...in the bush....

i like to do things u like to do
....i like to do it do it

I gladly invite anyone and everyone who believes that we need to pay more taxes to please do so at this time. No one is stopping you, and I'm sure the IRS will be more than happy to accept your generous contributions.

Show me one single Democrat who pays extra taxes just because they feel it's the right thing to do, and I will eat an entire bucket of shit without the aid of any condiments to disguise the flavor.

Until then might I suggest that bellyaching democrats from sea to shining sea either bone up or shut up. I'll take my paycheck as is if you don't mind.

[GoodSpeak]

Statistics, My Brother.


We [America] are the most under taxed Nation in the entire World.


Bar none.



I fail to see the complaint.

No complaint. I just can't figure all these people out who claim we need to pay more taxes. Most Dems seem to think that way. And I say be my guest. If thats what you want to do with your own money, feel free. Leave mine the fuck alone, thank you.

Especially until the govrnment cuts out all the bullshit pork.

[frankiepop]

see this is where some republicans are such dumb fuckers...


what demo's believe is that we should just grab the goddamn tax cash out the greed filled pockets of those damn hard working americans who inherited or made a lot of money. we call it their fair 'fuckin' share.

we just might need to pay for this goddamn long expensive war ahead of us...

o god, where's clinton when u need him...

dont any republicans even take economics 101....???

[GoodSpeak]

Agreed.

But the reality is, services just plain cost more...taxes pay for those services. We either pay or do without. Bottom line.


Cutting pork is a seperate issue.

[frankiepop]

cutting 'pork' is almost always a subterfuge to reality...

[Monte Smith]

Originally posted by frankiepop
o god, where's clinton when u need him...

Davos, Switzerland.

[moneyp]

Originally posted by Scott Dolan
Show me one single Democrat who pays extra taxes just because they feel it's the right thing to do, and I will eat an entire bucket of shit without the aid of any condiments to disguise the flavor.

My landlady does exactly that! She doesn't file all of her deductions because, as a member of the upper class, she feels she should give as much back to the country as she can. The weirdo.

As soon as I confirm she's a Democrat (which I believe she is) you can start filling the bucket.

[Enforcer]

Originally posted by frankiepop
subterfuge

Black Fire, baby.

Worthless but always able to spy an Andrew Hill reference,
Larry

The attorney for the company I work for has a sign on his desk that says "eschew obfuscation".

Guess there's some wisdom in that.................

[Gary Sisco]

Any of us here with the possible exception of Goodie stand as good a chance as Kerry. Let's put it that way.

[RBS]

Yes.

[Gordon B]

Crawjo, good article. Edwards had a better chance than Kerry, not because he's any better or worse, but because he has only served one term in the Senate, whereas Kerry was elected for the fourth time two years ago. Edwards has a much shorter record to attack and he seems "fresher." The Presidential election track record for sitting members of Congress with 16+ years of continuous experience is dismal.

Strong Democrat identifiers will have no problem supporting Kerry or Edwards. People like Gary, or Al in NYC who think that the mainstream Democratic party is way too conservative for their tastes will not like Kerry or Edwards.

[Chris D]

The "cut pork" thing from Republicans makes me laugh.
Have you seen any of the anlysis of where spending has gone since the GOP took over Congress? They are the undisputed kings of pork; it's no contest.

[jesus marion joseph]

Originally posted by Chris D
The "cut pork" thing from Republicans makes me laugh.
Have you seen any of the anlysis of where spending has gone since the GOP took over Congress? They are the undisputed kings of pork; it's no contest.

There's definitely not much room for Republican members of congress to point the fingers at Democrats for profligate spending.

[frankiepop]

scrotum boy throws his hat in the ring
he could beat the bush..

push push in the bush....
(mystique disco)

[GoodSpeak]

Originally posted by Gary Sisco
Any of us here with the possible exception of Goodie stand as good a chance as Kerry. Let's put it that way.

I'd beat yer ass, Gary.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally posted by jesus marion joseph
There's definitely not much room for Republican members of congress to point the fingers at Democrats for profligate spending.

That is quite possibly THE most open minded thing I have ever seen you type on this BBS. I hereby sincerely apologize for any mean spirited political commentary I ever hurled in your direction, my friend. No BS.


Right on, JMJ.

[Dr Dave]

Yes, Kerry can beat Bush. Yes, he can.

[Captain Hate]

Been samplin' the mushrooms again, Dr Dave??

[GoodSpeak]

Did they change up your meds again, Captn. Hate?

[Captain Hate]

Have your students learned anything this school year?

[GoodSpeak]

Apparently there are some negative side effects causing irrational responses, eh?


C'mon, man...we'll work with ya ;-)

[Monte Smith]

Hm. Goodspeak versus Gary Sisco in a race for President of the United States of America!

Although a perfect impossibility, I confess that the fictional scenario is compelling as a thought-exercise. Who would win?

You have Gary Sisco. His platform is logical, coherently laid out, and anathema to 99% of American voters.

You have Goodspeak. He has no platform, he's about as coherent as a room full of retards, and you have to doubt his competency in something as simple as crapping his pants.

Huh.

I guess that Goodspeak would win the election, simply because he'd run on pablum. I guess he'd also get my vote. Reluctantly. Gary Sisco is by far the better man. But come on. I'd trust a commie in the White House like I'd trust a horny dog with an ass-shaped Milkbone.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally posted by Monte Smith
Hm. Goodspeak versus Gary Sisco in a race for President of the United States of America!

Although a perfect impossibility, I confess that the fictional scenario is compelling as a thought-exercise. Who would win?

You have Gary Sisco. His platform is logical, coherently laid out, and anathema to 99% of American voters.

You have Goodspeak. He has no platform, he's about as coherent as a room full of retards, and you have to doubt his competency in something as simple as crapping his pants.

Huh.

I guess that Goodspeak would win the election, simply because he'd run on pablum. I guess he'd also get my vote. Reluctantly. Gary Sisco is by far the better man. But come on. I'd trust a commie in the White House like I'd trust a horny dog with an ass-shaped Milkbone.

Thus Spake Monte.


Our resident naysayer with the fanatical political bent of mind.


Yup.


No credibility gap here...










































SheYEAHright.

[Gary Sisco]

Beat my ass at what, teach? Get a clue.

Gordon -- It's not unimportant that "guys like me" wouldn't vote for Kerry. Neither "major" party commands more than a third of the voting population's loyalty (and the nonvoting population's opinions and thoughts are entirely irrelevant on election day). That means no one gets elected without substantial support from independents who are not aligned with either party and won't be. In an election as close as this will be, which will be down to the wire, all the way, regardless of who the dems pick, it will be the independents who decide, not party stalwarts. There simply aren't enough stalwarts in either party to carry an election without substantial independent support.

As for Kerry, it's not that the dems are too conservative (though they are -- I mean, look how everyone's running from the dreaded label of "liberal," like guys did the word "communist" during the 50s), it's that he's a dishonest man and one who changes his stripes from day to day to suit his own ambitions. In short, a man without principle, which again in short, means an opportunist. Which he's always been, consistently, since his youth. Nothing he says today matters tomorrow and was never intended to. I'd not vote for anyone like that on the muncipal level, never mind the choice of who controls the nuke button and who doesn't.

[walto]

I absolutely agree with Gary about Kerry's true colors. I've never been able to stomach that guy. He's the phoniest of phonies.

I'll vote for him if he's nominated though.

BTW, Gary, if you're still around, I had a question for you on the WHRB orgy thread.