So over on Blogs for Bush a commenter writes:
I need some support here. I’ve been in a pretty heated argument with my girlfriend over this issue (Kerry and the Swift Vets) for the past couple days now. She’s been getting on my case about being so negative about Kerry all the time and not actually talking about issues.
Here’s my answer:
Yeah, I get that too from my wife, that’s why I started blogging about the election. That’s probably why I’m going to volunteer for Bush today, so I can have some fellow travelers to rag about Kerry to.
But I think you’re asking the wrong question. Here’s my take:
- I give Kerry 10 points for going to Vietnam
- I give Kerry - 1 point for speaking out against the war in the way that he did at the time (which at this point everyone agrees was FUBAR),
- I give Kerry -5 points for not apologizing since then and the generally bad way he’s handled this issue.
Net: 4 points.
So Kerry comes out ahead 4 points for me.
A candidate has to earn at least 25 points for me to consider voting for them, and Kerry hasn’t done that. I’ve tried very hard to find positive things about Kerry, I’ve read both his and bush’s web site, and I come up with zilch.
Bush has earned about 75 points in my book based on reading his agenda.
So stop being negative, start talking up Bush. Read Kessler’s book a matter of character, and start talking about the importance of phonics in reading education and NCLB.
You can read my take on No Child Left Behind here.
Comments (2)
Opinionated Bastard-
I must have not expressed my question correctly. I’m not in a debate about the good or bad points of Bush vs Kerry. My girlfriend is a Republican and supports Bush and will be voting for Bush because we both support his domestic and foreign policies (although she doesn’t like No Child Left Behind as she is a teacher and sees some downfalls to it for some reason).
Anyway, I’m just trying to debate the point about John Kerry’s effect on the country back during Vietnam. I’m under the impression that he was the trigger to America turning on both the war AND the soldiers. I’m under the impression that if it were not for him and his testimony about labeling all the soldiers war criminals and baby-killers, then the Vietnam War veterans would not have been spit on and considered criminals all these years.
She, on the other hand, says that there was a lot more involved with the country back then and Kerry didn’t have that much of an effect as everyone is saying now.
I will be doing my own research, but I wanted to throw the question out there to someone more knowledgable about the time period and how Vietnam Vets came to be hated and spat on by American citizens.
Posted by Michael in MI | September 8, 2004 2:36 PM
Posted on September 8, 2004 14:36
You’re going to have a hard time separating the VVAW from Kerry. I suspect that VVAW was a very effective organization but how much Kerry contributed to that effectiveness is going to be a mystery.
It was enough to partially launch him in a political career…
Posted by The Bastard | September 8, 2004 3:04 PM
Posted on September 8, 2004 15:04