One of the things that's bothered me about Kerry is his attituted towards the war, and the military in general. I think it's safe to say that a large portion of the military doesn't think much of him. And then I find this piece:
http://www.redstate.org/story/2004/8/7/123128/4371 . If the author has done his analysis correctly, the conclusion is very worrisome.
There is a lot of feel good stuff there for those who don't like the idea that wars really exist and are sometimes necessary, and a lot of stuff, which if actually put into policy, would make the world a lot more unsafe for everyone, especially Americans, and especially Americans here at home.
Friday, August 13, 2004
Kerry
I don't think I really suffer from KDS (Kerry derangement syndrome, presumably the counterpart to BDS), but something about the man really irks me.
As I tried to point out to my sister, he's running his entire campaign on VietNam, and while that's all well and good, if he wants me to consider voting for him, he better be out there telling me what he's going to do for the country now. My sister assures me that he has plans, but they all seem to be buried on his website, and as the candidate he should be out there telling me, not making me do all the work to find out what direction he wants the country to go.
I have found some good stuff on his economic plan, though the people who did that apparently had to do a lot of digging themselves.
So go forth and read here: http://techcentralstation.com/081304C.html and then follow the links in that article. I don't think the author is really too biased; he's not in the Bush camp. Someplace else I've read that if Kerry's plans were to go through, over the next four years we'd be looking at an extra $6,000 in taxes per taxpayer. Now that's an average, and if you make at the lower end of the spectrum, your share would presumably be smaller, but still, that's the equivalent of losing two months af my husband's Navy retirement check per year for our family.
As I tried to point out to my sister, he's running his entire campaign on VietNam, and while that's all well and good, if he wants me to consider voting for him, he better be out there telling me what he's going to do for the country now. My sister assures me that he has plans, but they all seem to be buried on his website, and as the candidate he should be out there telling me, not making me do all the work to find out what direction he wants the country to go.
I have found some good stuff on his economic plan, though the people who did that apparently had to do a lot of digging themselves.
So go forth and read here: http://techcentralstation.com/081304C.html and then follow the links in that article. I don't think the author is really too biased; he's not in the Bush camp. Someplace else I've read that if Kerry's plans were to go through, over the next four years we'd be looking at an extra $6,000 in taxes per taxpayer. Now that's an average, and if you make at the lower end of the spectrum, your share would presumably be smaller, but still, that's the equivalent of losing two months af my husband's Navy retirement check per year for our family.
Pointless Political Rant
Trying a different font. Hmm.
Spent half an hour on the phone with my little sister yesterday. She lives out in SF, and is firmly entrenched in Blue State America, both physically and mentally. Not only has she actually said that Bush is Hitler, but she also thinks he is the anti-Christ, that Kerry is going to lower my taxes and the federal deficit, that Bush is going to raise my taxes and the federal deficit, that the only reason the Arabs hate us is that we support Israel (which I doubt is the reason that the Ottoman Empire was waltzing up to the gates of Vienna, or any of the problems during the period between WWI and WWII), and that the reason the Cold War lasted as long as it did is because we were in Cuba.
I understand the Israel thing, even if I think she's wrong. I've certainly heard enough other people spout that line. But where does the Cold War/Cuba thing come from? I have to admit that I don't know much about post WWII world history, but even my Blue State mother thought that was a rather odd comment, and my 20+ year navy vet husband's reaction was pretty close to twirling his finger beside his temple.
Oh, and by the way, we need universal national health care. I attempted to point out to her how much higher her taxes would have to be to pay for this, but all she could do is point me to the wonders of Canada. When I tried to remind her that Canadians die on the waiting lists to get in to see specialists, when here they would get in within a few weeks at most, all she could do was keep repeating that at least Canadians could all get health care. So I suppose the fact that we can all end up on waiting lists and die waiting is better than getting at least most people in soon enough to treat the disease process before it becomes terminal, since the triage for this is partly whether the ill person can afford the treatment. Not that I really know any doctor who will turn away a person who really needs his care. Physicians have no trouble with charity care; they do have a problem with having to basically be employees of a system which doesn't pay them a living wage, and which constantly interferes with their treatment decisions. Which last time I looked was considered practicing medicine without a license. But then I suppose that's OK as long as everyone gets free health care.
Just wait till she actually has a real job and has to pay real taxes. She may change her mind when she is trying to support a family of 4 on 50K a year in a place where rents are over 1K per month, and she is losing close to 25% of her paycheck in income and payroll taxes. That will leave her with barely 2K per month to pay all her utilities, her car payment, her insurance, her food, her clothes, a little bit of entertainment, and maybe actually put something away to pay for her retirement and her kids' college. The last thing I want is the federal government telling me they know how to spend my money better than I do, and not giving me any choice in the matter. Especially since the money they're taking right now for my retirement won't be there when I'm ready to recieve it, or not without some major restructuring, which neither of the main parties seems willing to do.
Spent half an hour on the phone with my little sister yesterday. She lives out in SF, and is firmly entrenched in Blue State America, both physically and mentally. Not only has she actually said that Bush is Hitler, but she also thinks he is the anti-Christ, that Kerry is going to lower my taxes and the federal deficit, that Bush is going to raise my taxes and the federal deficit, that the only reason the Arabs hate us is that we support Israel (which I doubt is the reason that the Ottoman Empire was waltzing up to the gates of Vienna, or any of the problems during the period between WWI and WWII), and that the reason the Cold War lasted as long as it did is because we were in Cuba.
I understand the Israel thing, even if I think she's wrong. I've certainly heard enough other people spout that line. But where does the Cold War/Cuba thing come from? I have to admit that I don't know much about post WWII world history, but even my Blue State mother thought that was a rather odd comment, and my 20+ year navy vet husband's reaction was pretty close to twirling his finger beside his temple.
Oh, and by the way, we need universal national health care. I attempted to point out to her how much higher her taxes would have to be to pay for this, but all she could do is point me to the wonders of Canada. When I tried to remind her that Canadians die on the waiting lists to get in to see specialists, when here they would get in within a few weeks at most, all she could do was keep repeating that at least Canadians could all get health care. So I suppose the fact that we can all end up on waiting lists and die waiting is better than getting at least most people in soon enough to treat the disease process before it becomes terminal, since the triage for this is partly whether the ill person can afford the treatment. Not that I really know any doctor who will turn away a person who really needs his care. Physicians have no trouble with charity care; they do have a problem with having to basically be employees of a system which doesn't pay them a living wage, and which constantly interferes with their treatment decisions. Which last time I looked was considered practicing medicine without a license. But then I suppose that's OK as long as everyone gets free health care.
Just wait till she actually has a real job and has to pay real taxes. She may change her mind when she is trying to support a family of 4 on 50K a year in a place where rents are over 1K per month, and she is losing close to 25% of her paycheck in income and payroll taxes. That will leave her with barely 2K per month to pay all her utilities, her car payment, her insurance, her food, her clothes, a little bit of entertainment, and maybe actually put something away to pay for her retirement and her kids' college. The last thing I want is the federal government telling me they know how to spend my money better than I do, and not giving me any choice in the matter. Especially since the money they're taking right now for my retirement won't be there when I'm ready to recieve it, or not without some major restructuring, which neither of the main parties seems willing to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)