Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Kerry Wins Hat Trick: Three Out Of Three Debates

Kerry has won the hat trick, winning all three debates. More significantly, the debates have shown Kerry as a man capable of becoming President, while Bush has shown himself to be unfit for the job.

In question after question, Kerry provided numerous facts to support his case, with Bush being clearly out of his league. Unable to even understand the issues under discussion, Bush again resorted to his usual sound bites, generally lying and misquoting Kerry in the hopes of maintaining the support of the sheep in his base. Apparently Karl Rove has given up on the middle, hoping that they can excite enough right wing fanatics to vote to win the election.

Bush's strategy is to label Kerry as a liberal, again making false claims about Kerry's voting record. This is based upon surveys in The National Journal. In 2003 Kerry was ranked as most liberal, but the editors of The National Journal have repeatedly stated that these results are not valid due to Kerry missing many votes while running for President. In total career rankings, Kerry fell number 11 among Democrats.
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=11&view=findpost&p=1091

Bush ignored Kerry's record which is far from left wing on issues from balance budget support for police, and support for a strong national defense.To claim that Kerry is too liberal, Bush repeated claims that Kerry voted for tax increases 98 times, counting votes on the same measures many times. He also ignored Kerry's support for middle class tax cuts.

Bush also repeated the false claims of Kerry's health care plan being a big government plan. Actually it is a fairly conservative plan, with The Kiplinger Letter calling it favorable to small business and Newt Gingrich having made similar proposals for government backed reinsurance of catastrophic claims. Bush invented some figures as to the cost of paying for everyone to join the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. Bush was way off on this one. Kerry's plan is to allow individuals or employers to buy into this plan, not for the government to provide this to anyone.

While maybe those on other internets such as Dick Cheney would go to http://www.factcheck.com, on this internet check out factcheck.org for the truth on Kerry's health plan

A Bush ad claims Kerry’s healthcare proposals would put "big government in charge" of medical decisions. In fact, Kerry's plan would leave 97% with the insurance they have now -- while up to 27 million who aren't insured would gain coverage.

Bush's claim turns out to be based on opinions from two conservative advocates whose predictions aren't supported by neutral experts.
http://www.factcheck.org/article264.html


Of course Kerry is a liberal, but one in the mainstream while Bush has governed from the far right, making Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, and perhaps even Benito Mussolini look moderate in comparison. Being a mainstream liberal is not a bad thing. To quote Joe Conasson

If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=42
Bush also attempted to misquote Kerry again by twisting Kerry's words on global test and terrorism, but Kerry quickly corrected the record. Without being able to distort Kerry's record, Bush was left with nothing.

The big "gotcha" moment of the night was when Bush denied not being concerned about Osama bin Laden. As with the photos and videos of Cheney meeting Edwards, video soon came out to contradict Bush on this one
http://a9.g.akamai.net/7/9/8082/v003/democratic1.download.akamai.com/8082/video/notconcerned.wmv

Polls showed a clear win for John Kerry. CNN showed 52% believed Kerry won, as opposed to 39% for Bush. CBS showed that uncommitted voters picked Kerry 39% to 35%. The Bush campaign has spent millions to claim Kerry flip flops on the issues. Before the debate only 29% felt Kerry had clear positions on the issues, while after the debate 60% felt so. Looks like a lot of advertising money down the drain.

9 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was a great debate. The way Senator Kerry answered the question about homosexuality by using Cheney's daughter as an example was sheer genius! This splits the homophobic Republicans. Bob Schieffer should get a high office in the new Kerry administration for this.

6:31 AM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

Note how the Republicans are now attacking Kerry for bringing up Mary Cheney. For response on that, I'll quote conservative Andrew Sullivan:

SOMETHING ABOUT MARY: I keep getting emails asserting that Kerry's
mentioning of Mary Cheney is somehow offensive or gratuitous or a "low
blow". Huh? Mary Cheney is out of the closet and a member, with her
partner, of the vice-president's family. That's a public fact. No one's
privacy is being invaded by mentioning this. When Kerry cites Bush's
wife or daughters, no one says it's a "low blow." The double standards
are entirely a function of people's lingering prejudice against gay
people. And by mentioning it, Kerry showed something important. This
issue is not an abstract one. It's a concrete, human and real one. It
affects many families, and Bush has decided to use this cynically as a
divisive weapon in an election campaign. He deserves to be held to
account for this - and how much more effective than showing a real
person whose relationship and dignity he has attacked and minimized?
Does this makes Bush's base uncomfortable? Well, good. It's about time
they were made uncomfortable in their acquiescence to discrimination.
Does it make Bush uncomfortable? Even better. His decision to bar gay
couples from having any protections for their relationships in the
constitution is not just a direct attack on the family member of the
vice-president. It's an attack on all families with gay members - and
on the family as an institution. That's a central issue in this
campaign, a key indictment of Bush's record and more than relevant to
any debate. For four years, this president has tried to make gay people
invisible, to avoid any mention of us, to pretend we don't exist. Well,
we do. Right in front of him.

7:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ron I have to say "That's a very good explanation of Bush and his gay bashing political boys". I thought it was hilarious the way Kerry made the comment on Dick Cheney's daughter. He did it in a very professional manner to show how hypocritical these republicans can really be. Two of my very best guy friends are gay, but they have a heart of gold and would do anything for me if I needed it. Bush is always pointing out that Kerry "changes like the wind". Well, people need to realize that life is nothing but changing events. We change our minds everyday, it's a human thing.

Sarah

7:51 AM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

Sarah,

Andrew Sullivan's comments were very helpful. I'm glad that his support for gay issues trumps what would otherwise be a tendency to back Bush.

On some rare issues, Kerry has changed his mind over time, such as support for the death penalty for terrorists. He has wisely revised his views on NAFTA over time--it only makes sense to reevaluate the effects of treaty after it has been in effect. However, on most of the issues where Kerry has been accused of changing his views, there was no real change in position. Instead it has been repeated cases of Bush misquoting Kerry's positions, and then calling it a change in position when each successive misquote doesn't match the earlier misquotes.

It is also contradictory to claim that Kerry has changed is postions but to also claim he has been consistently the most liberal Senator. Bush even flip flops on his own lies.

8:01 AM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

Sarah,

Andrew Sullivan's comments were very helpful. I'm glad that his support for gay issues trumps what would otherwise be a tendency to back Bush.

On some rare issues, Kerry has changed his mind over time, such as support for the death penalty for terrorists. He has wisely revised his views on NAFTA over time--it only makes sense to reevaluate the effects of treaty after it has been in effect. However, on most of the issues where Kerry has been accused of changing his views, there was no real change in position. Instead it has been repeated cases of Bush misquoting Kerry's positions, and then calling it a change in position when each successive misquote doesn't match the earlier misquotes.

It is also contradictory to claim that Kerry has changed is postions but to also claim he has been consistently the most liberal Senator. Bush even flip flops on his own lies.

8:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Elizabeth Edwards tells it like it is. She is not afraid of the Republicans. The Cheney family is ashamed of their lesbian daughter. Let's hear more about the sick Bush/Cheney families. Are Bush daughters still alcoholics? Where is Jeb's daughter? Still in jail?

6:13 PM  
Blogger Patricia said...

After watching all three debates, I'm amazed that anyone would consider voting for Bush. The side by side comparison of the two men show one who is mature, intelligent, articulate and statesmanlike. It's certainly not the one who's occupied the Oval Office for the last three and three quarter years. It's soooo time for a change.

6:25 PM  
Blogger Ron Chusid said...

I started out responding the the above post on why anyone would still vote for Bush. My answer got so long I'll enter it as a new blog entry.

10:02 PM  
Blogger Pamela J. Leavey said...

Zen Yenta

Love your name!

12:50 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home