So, shall we expect you to retract your slams against Kerry and his supporters in this thread, then?
The law enabling independent counsel investigations expired on June 30, 1999. Since then, responsibility for appointing a special prosecutor has reverted to the Department of Justice, which was responsible before the law was passed in 1978. In my opinion, the independent counsel law was mostly an unmitigated waste of money. The few convictions that were gained could have been accomplished with normal investigatory procedures.
Squeeze me? I think you could learn from Stretch’s example. He is arguing fiscal responsibility. What are you arguing?
Fox Nooze! Now with 25% more simulated news-like product!
Here’s a challenge for the Kerry-bashers - when you can work out exactly what should have been paid, given the information in the links, then let us know. From what I can see, we’ve no idea WTF is going on. In the interests of truth decency and balance, do help, please…
Did you read the article? Some quotes the OP left out:
So this guy Lalka works for a subcontractor of a company contracted by the Kerry campaign. You really think he’s refusing to pay out of “rich bitch” syndrome? Dude who works for catering company probably != rich. Possibly not even Democrat!
Now this is coming to the attention of people in the campaign. Is there the least bit of evidence that the campaign knew about this? Not from the article. Frankly, if Kerry had known about it, I’d question his potential to run the country. How many pit threads are written by Dopers with micromanaging bosses? Delegate, for Og’s sake.
After reading that, how can it look that way to you? Please check your emotional baggage at the Cape Air ticket counter.
Personally I don’t like Lurch.
But having said that , for an airport mgt to get involved with some sort of cat fight with a presidential candidate who , if he wins ,can bring down the force of the FAA on said airport mgt , it strongly suggests that Kerrys team has a problem with dealing with problems of this nature.
At the very least the money should have been paid , or arranged to have some sort of auditor come in and see if some sort of contract/bill have to be paid , or was it a case of some double padding.
About two thirds of the way down , this quote clearly shows that someone in the upper ranks of the campaign clearly decided that paying the bill , would make this go away.
With three months to go or so , the kerry troops have to be more in tune with media gaffs like this and how to avoid em or manage them.
That’s the lamest kind of spin doctoring, dealing with microscopic issues of campaign arrangements rather than policy, issues, etc. Most voters are savvy enough to know that a campaign is a big enough enterprise that anybody can find something – a disgruntled business or slighted adjunct – and explain it as relavent by alluding vaguely to how it “looks” for Kerry, how there are “brush fires” (started by those same political hacks, of course) he hasn’t put out, and so on – all serving one purpose, which is to distract people from real issues, like what in the hell is he going to do if he gets into office.
relevant? That word always gets me.
Several points I would like to bring up.
I’ll bet that when the Kerry campaign contracted with the caterer, the subject of an airport fee in addition to the caterer fee may not have been made clear.
I’m reminded of a recent news story in Vancouver where an operator providing a park and ride service for airport passengers was required to pay the airport a significant mothly fee for the privilege of dropping off and picking up passengers.
I’m sick of opportunistic gouging and would challenge the airport operator to provide proof of any obligation agreed to by the Kerry campaign.
Yeah , my thought exactly if he was getting stiffed
The campaign person should have either paid the bill in full, or kick it upstairs to see if Kerry wants to run with that ball and challenge the bill. God knows enough people think that airports royally gouge people with nickle and dime services , or even stall and blame the Secret Service , for requiring a vetted catering org.
But once it started to smell, the kerry higher ups , decided after all that the bill would be paid in full.
I having a little trouble with this. maybe someone smarter than me can help me out.
It looks to me like this an issue between the airport and a subcontractor. The subcontractor may or may not have a legitimate beef. That’s open to debate.
But I see nothing yet to suggest that Kerry was involved in, or was even aware of the dispute. I see a 3rd hand quote that some guy claims to speak for the canidate.
What am I missing?
Not a thing - you’ve got it nailed.
And whenever anyone says that they think Kerry should have gotten involved in this matter personally, I’m reminded of Jimmy Carter working out the schedule for the tennis courts at the White House. I may not want Bush-like detachment, but I’d rather not have extreme micro-management, either.
It was Kerrys airplane , and this close to the election it becomes a kerry thing.
What it sounds like is Kerrys people that deal with this sort of thing , have it in place all over the country , with designated subs , for dealing with the small things.
This is normal logistics of a campaign , no need for any of Kerrys people to get involved ,beyond cutting the checks for the sub-contractor. But this happens ,and it looks bad on the kerry campaign , Kerrys people stepped in and paid the bill, I would expect that the sub-contractor will be losing a client shortly.
Looks bad my ass. Looks bad to whom? The voters don’t give a shit. Only the partisan hacks say it “looks bad,” and they’re paid to say shit like that. God, I hate that kind of rhetoric. What looks bad is rubes repeating it like its political wisdom when it’s nothing but horse droppings.
Yeah but it looks like he did get involved or his campaign people did , either way they did the right thing to get it worked out.
Looks bad , looks cheap , smells of…
If the rubes as you call em , don’t care then it won’t matter , but if Kerry loses a contested state because of it , then que sera sera.
If Kerry loses a state over a dispute between subcontractors and sub-sub-contractors, you have to just admire the power of the media pundits who tell people that this kind of thing is an issue.
It’s the job of political hacks to try to create impressions in the public. Factually accuracy has little or nothing to do with. It is indeed possible to create memes, carictures, or general impressions about a candidate with only the most nodding reference to facts.
Look what was done to Gore on the basis of a few distorted quotes. The Dems do it too. Dan Quayle was turned into a drooling idiot. Quayle was no genius but he probably didn’t have to ride the short bus to school or anything.
Right now, the Pubs are trying to find a cartoon “type” in which to cast Kerry. Stuff like “liberal” and “flip-flopper” isn’t getting much traction, so they’re giving “elitist” a shot. It’s not a given that something like this story couldn’t work. factually, it’s ridiculous on it’s face that this dispute had anything to do with John Kerry, but people aren’t very smart. If the pubbies can get “Kerry stiffed airport” to stick in people’s heads then they will have done their job.
The Dems would probably do the same to Bush if they had to. Fortunately for them, though, GWB has already given them a goldmine of REAL issues to hammer him on, so they don’t have to get creative.
The American campaign system in a nutshell.