Some very astute analysis of Kerry's flawed campaign by knowledgeable Kerry supporter, Thomas P.M. Barnett.
Barnett and I were classmates at the University of Wisconsin. He was one of the smartest guys I went to school with and he seems to be doing very well.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 22, 2004 01:12 PMLOSING????
Posted by: ? on October 22, 2004 04:01 PMIf the campaigns have to be so negative, why is there so much that Kerry (and the media) is NOT saying that should be said. E.g.:
1) How on earth can a Vice Pres or even just a VP candidate have an interest in a company so closely tied to his Office? Will the US pull out of Iraq when it is strategically correct or according to Cheney's involvement with Haliiburton?
2) The Republicans sought to impeach Clinton for lying about getting a blowjob. What should be done about a President who lied to - yes lied to - or at least mislead the American people and US allies?
3) Is it wise to elect a Christian Fundementalist Commander-in-Chief to fight Muslim Fundementalism?
4) It has been documented that many policy meetings were more like Bible classes and that Bush is a Christian fundementalist. Why are we wasting time with compalining about the 10 Commandments in front of a govt building and not questioning the election of a Christian Fundementalist as being a violation of the separation of Church and State.
5) Bush got his 1st passport when he became President. Is this who we are voting for to lead the formulation of Foreign Policy?
6) If the US is again faced with a threat, say Iran or N. Korea, and the C-i-Chief seeks authority to use force, which one will be believed Bush or Kerry?
7) Where are the questions regarding the Bush-Ben Ladin connection. Who got the Ben Ladin's out of the US after 9/11 in one of the only flights over US air-space?
Briank:
Wow.
What an incredibly revealing comment.
Just curious, though, for question 6, do you mean from Congress, or the UN? Because it would seem that Congress, if it's in the hands of the GOP, is likely to go along w/ Dubya, and not necessarily so w/ Kerry.
Oh, and in 9-11 Commission testimony, Richard Clarke said that he, himself, had authorized the departure of the Bin Ladens.
And using poor intelligence (which was in line w/ what other countries' intel services were also saying) is not the same as lying about intelligence.
Okay, I'll answer that.
1) Cheney has no continuing interest in Halliburton. His remuneration from Halliburton depends not one whit on anything he or Halliburton does. In addition, Halliburton stock has _lost_ value since Cheney became VP.
2) Being incorrect is not the same as lying. Failure to comprehend this difference is symptomatic of mental incompetence, or a public school education.
3&4) Do you suggest that the American electorate should be forbidden from voting for a Christian? Are only Buddhists and atheists eligible for public office?
5) Huh? Sen. Kerry has never cashed a welfare check. Is this the kind of man to whom we would entrust domestic policy?
6) If the US is again faced with a threat, say Iran or N. Korea, which CinC would ask for authority to use force? Which one would ask the UNSC to tell him how to vote? (As Sen. Kerry claims he was doing on Sep. 30 2002).
7) Richard Clarke. Yes, that Richard Clarke.
Posted by: buzz harsher on October 25, 2004 01:53 PM