View Full Version : Kerry for the "common man"?
09-02-04, 07:11 PM
09-02-04, 09:39 PM
C'mon Rusty, that seems like a common-man type lifestyle to me. I know I just sold MY Italian villa, too, and am now down to only 4 multi-million dollar homes to get by in.
I think I'll go windsurfing...or maybe sailing...
Or you could go striper fishing from your very own yacht, launched from your private compound in one of the most exclusive resort towns in America. Pretty heady stuff for a common rancher from Crawford, Tx. LOL!
[This message has been edited by Grady (edited 09-02-2004).]
09-03-04, 12:50 AM
"W" is for Wooly Bugger
Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish they are after.
- Henry David Thoreau
[This message has been edited by TangledUp (edited 09-02-2004).]
09-03-04, 08:38 AM
Only 60 more shopping days 'til the general election!!!
09-03-04, 09:29 AM
Grady, the point is, obviously, that Kerry, and Dems in general, claim to be for the "little guy", to the exclusion of all others, when thay oftern have nothing in common with them. Which is certainly true in this case, as was Rusty's point.
BTW, a Boston Whaler is not a yacht.
Also, the Bush compound in Maine is his family's, and he has his ranch in Texas. That is still much closer to the common man than Kerry would ever stoop to.
Kerry married a co-worker's super-rich widow. He is a disingenious, elitist cad.
Joke: Bush claimed approximately $800,000 income last year on his 1040 form. Thats not even "dating material" for John Kerry. http://www.georgia-outdoors.com/ubbngto/smile.gif
Would someone pleae tell me what is so horribly evil about being wealthy?
People who engage in class warfare are the ones we should complain about.
kerry is rich, bush is rich. edwards is rich, cheney is rich.
face it, I will go out on a limb and say some of these common folks leaders make more in investments in one year than most people on this board make in 5, let alone we the tax payers are paying their salaries, their health coverage, their retirement plans etc..
Oh and the difference between marrying money and inheriting money from daddy is _____ ??? cuz unlikes us slobs, they didnt really work for all that money now did they?
and to think these rich folks actually care about us.. hell we are just the hired help..
[This message has been edited by jeffg (edited 09-03-2004).]
09-03-04, 10:59 AM
Bush's daddy is still alive, so how did he inherit?
Another point: of the 4 cantidates for Pres and VP, Bush is the least wealthy. He is therefore the closest to being a common man.
Yep, i feel closer to bush already. he is just like me!!! I mean hell how could I miss that??
I am sorry, I forgot taht Bush never got anything handed to him by just being the son of Bush now did he. He earned every single thing in his life.
**** he just pulled himself up by his boot straps.
He is the epitome of self achievement, i cant believe I didnt see it earlier
( sarcasm sure is fun aint it.. btw your on my side of the car again! and I am tellin)
09-03-04, 11:37 AM
My point, FM, is that Kerry doesn't pretend he's not wealthy. Why is it so hard for Republicans to understand that many wealthy people have compassion for those less fortunate and favor government policy to help them? Bush bought his faux ranch as a prop for his presidential bid so he could appear to be a "heartlander", yet his policies greatly favor the rich. Go figure.
As the line goes, Bush was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.
[This message has been edited by Grady (edited 09-03-2004).]
09-03-04, 02:22 PM
You bring up an excellent point: "many wealthy people have compassion for those less fortunate and favor government policy to help them?" Those would be wealthy democrats. Many wealthy republicans also have compassion for those less fortunate, and give their OWN resources to help them. It's real easy to be compassionate with somebody else's money, and it is wrong. Donating resources should be a personal choice, not a government imposed requirement.
Another thought: Democrats say that the hated evil rich are mostly republicans, as evidenced by the rich being the only ones that benefitted from the Bush tax cuts. Now you imply that there are many wealthy democrats, too. Wouldn't they also benefit from those tax cuts, and then have more moola to personally spread to the less fortunate.
As we discovered during the 2000 election, Bush gave much more to charities than Gore. If I remember right, Gore was a pitiful contributor. I wonder if this is why Kerry and his sugar-mommy won't release their tax records?
Dam, those pesky records again...tax records...military records...Senate records...
Well, you're off on a different discusson now, FM. I guess what I'm getting at in my ususal round about fashion is this: Some of you seem to be arguing that because Kerry is very wealthy he is somehow disqualified from any discussion of the concerns, problems, etc., of the working class. I think that's just silly. And equally silly is the notion that Bush wants you to believe, that because he owns a "ranch" and likes to be photographed cutting brush that he is in touch with us wee folk.
[This message has been edited by Grady (edited 09-03-2004).]
09-03-04, 04:24 PM
He is in touch with this common man (it has nothing to do with his ranch, or any photos).
Can't say the same 'bout JFK.
09-03-04, 05:41 PM
FishMonger - Bush gave more to charities than Gore because Bush had way more money and needed the tax write offs! You want a "common man" based on income? Gore was the only one in recent times to come from a background other that family wealth. You would have to go back to Nixon/Ford for that and they were career politicians.
As far as "being in touch", that is a campaign slogan used to appeal to those with incomes in what used to be called the Middle Class range. Bush & Cheney have about as much empathy and understanding of what it means to fight each month to pay the bills as they do first hand experience at walking on the moon. And that does not make them bad people or incapable. But don't buy the advertising slogans, either. Same is true for Kerry who comes from a background of wealth. About the only candidate in this pack who has a clue is Edwards because he is the only real self-made millionaire in the bunch.
And the golden rule applies: "Those who have the gold make the rules". That's why you don't see significant political process reform that would make the party system obsolete and open the door to politics for those of average income. It won't happen.
09-03-04, 10:02 PM
Hello? Gore is definately from a wealthy family. He was raised in a luxury hotel in D.C., rode in limos to private school, and was programmed to be a leading member of the elite, ruling class from his birth by his U.S. Senator father. That is why he is looney now about not being Pres. He can not complete his programming, and has blown a fuse! http://www.georgia-outdoors.com/ubbngto/smile.gif
As far as Bush, all I'm sayin' is that I like the guy. I trust him to make good decisions on some important items. I like some of his past decisions. He is not perfect, not by a mile. Who is? But, in MY OPINION, he is the best man for the job right now. BTW, I am perfectly capable of recognizing and decifering slogans. I read them here all the time. http://www.georgia-outdoors.com/ubbngto/smile.gif
How do I always get sucked into this cr@P? http://www.georgia-outdoors.com/ubbngto/smile.gif http://www.georgia-outdoors.com/ubbngto/smile.gif
Serious question, FM. Do you just accept without question everything the Republican National Committee spouts. While the hotel where Gore grew up may be a luxury hotel today, when Gore's family lived there decades ago it was a fairly non-decript apartement building. Are you unaware that Bush, Cheney, Zell Miller, et al play you for a rube, or do you just not care?
"The Westin Fairfax Hotel on Embassy Row in Washington is a luxury destination these days. In the 1950s and 1960s, however, it was just the Fairfax — a plain-Jane apartment hotel owned by Gore Sr.'s cousin Grady Gore. The Gores lived in a cramped, four-room apartment and "got a great break on the rent," says Frank Hunger, Gore's brother-in-law and best friend. It had one small bathroom and two bedrooms, one shared by Al and his sister Nancy, who was 10 years older."
09-04-04, 12:18 AM
Serious answer: I don't accept anything that any party spouts blindly. Contrary to your assumption, I am not a Republican. I consider myself a Libertarian, but vote Republican most often because I don't want to waste my vote on Libertarians that cannot win, and of the 2 major parties, Republicans come closest to my views. Just to back up my story: in 1980 I voted John Anderson, 1984 & 1988 no vote (apathetic), 1992 Clinton, 1996 Dole, 2000 W. Does that sound like a Pavlovian Rebublican's voting history? As you can see, I have evolved towards being more conservative. As a political philosophy it make the most sense to me, logically, as an ambitious provider for my family, and as protector of my family. I see the Repub as the ones that will let me keep more of what I make, and use what they do take more wisely. The use more wisely is open to debate, but what are you going to do? Dems have not proven to be any better at that in the last 40 years. What I don't particularly appreciate about the Repub platform is the tendency to interject religion into too many discussions, and the insistance of making abortion a political issue.
I live by 2 rules of thumb: "Live and let live", and "Question authority". I dream about MUCH less government in our lives. The Republican party claims to be for a lesser version of that dream. The Democratic party doesn't even consider less government as an option. I can not abide by that philosophy.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.