(Normally I’d put this in GD, but it’s really more of a lament than a debate.)
So, my mom and dad stop at my house last night on their way back from visiting friends in Boston. While there, her friend told her that Kerry served as Lt. Gov. What? Really? Why aren’t they saying anything about this? For God’s sake, half the reason that swing voters like my mom (I find it hard to believe that any are left, but there she is) are reluctant to vote for Kerry–regardless of how they feel about Bush–is that the Kerry campaign has told them nothing about his background (other than in Vietnam). She has heard little about his past legislative experience, and had no idea he had ANY executive experience whatsoever.
SIGH.
Dear Kerry camp, please tell us more about Kerry’s fine experience. Then he might win like we hope. Thank you.
Perhaps they want to avoid the association with Dukakis (the Governor at the time) and Massachusetts (perhaps viewed as an overly liberal state).
Although that doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense, but that’s all I can come up with. At this point, Kerry’s election resume looks like College -> Vietnam ->… ->Running for President which would seem to leave a lot of people hanging for more info.
In addition to what Mullinator said, it also doesn’t help matters that Lt. Gov. is (for the most part) not the sort of job one brags about whilst running for President.
Forget the Lt. Governor. I’ve heard very little about his Senate record, except for bits and pieces from conservative sources that after the first WTC attack he proposed legislation to cut intelligence spending, something even Ted Kennedy couldn’t get on board with.
He spent 4 months in Vietnam. Wouldn’t his 19 year Senate record be more important?
Could be. Massachusetts does have a reputation as an overly liberal state. As well as one that likes to tax the bejeezus out of its citizens.
This is exactly why a lot of people are leery of Kerry. Myself included. The way he’s presenting himself, it’s as if he went into cryogenic suspension at the end of the Vietnam War, and only re-emerged last summer.
Proposed cutting intel spending? What does that even mean? Rumsfeld cut spending on the Army, after all he cut the Crusader and the Commanche programs.
It’s all about context. Too bad this stuff gets thrown out the window in this black and white political world we’ve allowed to form.
Btw Ivylass, I wasn’t attacking you personally, I was more throwing my hands up in exasperation. Both sides do it, and it drives me coo coo for coco puffs.
Why indeed? The intelligence community has done such a superlative job with the funds they’ve received in the past (most recently: FBI fails to translate Al Quaeda tapes), that more money is surely the answer, rather than restructuring and intelligent recruiting. :rolleyes:
The CIA had been allocated money for a series of new spy satellites, but they decided not to build them. Kerry’s unsuccessfull bill would have rescinded that money. The bill was killed by the Republican majority, but the Republicans quickly followed up with a bill that cut more than twice that much. So, who’s irresponsible?
Mullinator has it; he only had the job for 2 years, it was under Dukakis, he didn’t accomplish anything with it (the MA LG has no duties other than to leave a phone number just in case), and as I remember he spent most of his term in office running for Senate anyway.
1/3rd of a tour. Most of us spent 12 months, Marines spent 13 months. 3 purple hearts for all minor injuries got him an early out. Roughly equivalent to joining the National Guard.
I had two buddies who rotated out after 3 purple hearts, then requested reassignment and went back for a second tour. One of them made it back, even.
Kerry was smart to collect all the purple hearts he could for minor, questionable injuries in order to get home ASAP, before he got killed. He was scared, and rightly so.
Kerry is too left and has too much baggage to be elected. This realization sank in after the primary season and before the convention. That is why nearly the entire convention was about VIetnam and him “reporting for duty”. It’s also why his entire Senate career is MIA from the campaign. Edwards would have been a much tougher opponent for GWB and maybe could have won. Kerry will not.