Senator Kerry's *I have a plan*.....

[blowero]

By the way, your first criticism doesn’t really hold water either:

@Starving Artist

Their “plan” is to build a coalition, but they don’t say how they’re going to do it. Their “plan” is to make the “right decisions” in regard to Iraq, but they don’t say what these “right decisions” are.

Kerry has specifically said he plans to hold a summit with our allies to discuss sharing the responsibilities in Iraq. As already pointed out in this thread, Germany has already indicated that they would attend such a summit, so that’s encouraging right there. What else is it you want? A script of what he’s going to say at the summit? The “right decisions” involve trying to turn it into a true multilateral effort, and getting more troops on the ground for the present. What is Kerry not telling you that you want to know? He doesn’t have a time machine - he can only tell you his plan. He can’t go into the future and tell you he succeeded.

[Aeschines]

@Starving Artist

The problem, Aeschines, is that Kerry isn’t speaking of them as goals. He is claiming to have actual plans to bring these things about, or at least that’s what he wants the electorate to think.

And Bush speaks of “goals” when he talks about defeating terrorism or the economy or the future. And yes, this is what politicians usually do, they speak of their goals. But Kerry confidently and baldfacedly claims to have actual plans not only to try to accomplish these goals, but which will certainly accomplish them. Thus, he has no credibility with me or anyone else who wants to judge his likely presidency based on what he says.

Ohmuhgosh, what a liar! He said “plan” instead of “goal”!

Bush speaks of “goals”? I haven’t heard that. I haven’t heard “plan,” either. I’ve heard “It’s hard work” and other barely comprehensible talking points and political locutions. I have yet to see the man make sense or approach coherence. In other words, the man just seems pathetic when he talks.

Kerry has “goals,” rudimentary “plans”–call them whatever you like. Kerry has his talking-point moments, it’s true. But he’s much more coherent and seems much more honest that Bush. I don’t see where credibility is a problem.

[blowero]

And BTW, even if Kerry fails, it’s still better than Bush, who doesn’t even have a plan at all.

[Desmostylus]

@blowero

…Bush, who doesn’t even have a plan at all.

Course he’s got a plan.

1. Invade Iraq
3. Profit!

It’s just that there’s an obvious problem with the plan.

[Starving_Artist]

@blowero

So what has he done that every single presidential candidate in the history of the United States hasn’t done?

Well, I don’t recall too many of them stating flat out that they were going to change this or that when the this or that was something outside the powers of the president acting alone to do. The only one who really comes to mind is Carter, who even said in so many words that the reason he didn’t keep certain of his campaign promises was that once you’re in the postition of having to try to get it done, you find there are reasons why you can’t that you didn’t know about before.

If I remember correctly, I thought to myself something like “duh!”

The same holds true for Kerry…but the difference is he knows it, and that makes it even more dishonest.

@blowero

You mean like Bush?

Aw, what a shame. And I spent so much time composing that little analogy hoping for a good faith answer out of you.

[Starving_Artist]

@Aeschines

Ohmuhgosh, what a liar! He said “plan” instead of “goal”

Yeah, there’s a big difference. That is precisely why he says he has a plan instead of a goal. He knows there’s a difference, and so do you.

[Starving_Artist]

@blowero

By the way, your first criticism doesn’t really hold water either:

Kerry has specifically said he plans to hold a summit with our allies to discuss sharing the responsibilities in Iraq. As already pointed out in this thread, Germany has already indicated that they would attend such a summit, so that’s encouraging right there. What else is it you want? A script of what he’s going to say at the summit? The “right decisions” involve trying to turn it into a true multilateral effort, and getting more troops on the ground for the present. What is Kerry not telling you that you want to know? He doesn’t have a time machine - he can only tell you his plan. He can’t go into the future and tell you he succeeded.

Well, the answer is within your own question. He isn’t saying he will “discuss” sharing the responsibilities, and he isn’t saying he will “try” to turn it into a multilateral effort. He’s saying he will accomplish these things, and by virtue of his plans!

But again, these aren’t really plans. They’re things he will try. Maybe they’ll work, maybe they won’t. Who knows?

“Plans” are certain specific courses of action that take into account obstacles and complexities and formulate ways to surmount them and accomplish the goal or task at hand. Ask Kerry for details of his “plans” and he will either regale you with what his plans won’t do, ala Bush, or he will state his hoped for result and refer to it as his plan. He doesn’t tell you anything about how he will go about accomplishing these plans in the normally understood meaning of the word, because he doesn’t really have any. If he gets into office he will wing it just like everybody else. He’ll get done what he’s able to, and he’ll fail to get done what he can’t.

His incessant talk of plans is simply an attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of an electorate that he either thinks is too stupid to know better, or to give fence-sitters who don’t know much about politics a reason to vote for him if they’re unhappy with Bush. But either way, he’s a liar and con man…telling people what they want to hear even though he knows better, just like a used car salesman selling someone a known piece of crap and passing it off as a great bargain.

[Polerius]

@Starving Artist

He isn’t saying he will “discuss” sharing the responsibilities, and he isn’t saying he will “try” to turn it into a multilateral effort. He’s saying he will accomplish these things, and by virtue of his plans!

But again, these aren’t really plans. They’re things he will try. Maybe they’ll work, maybe they won’t. Who knows?

Can we cut the BS?

Is this the first presidential candidate to talk of “plans” without giving concrete plans? Is this the first presidential candidate who said “I will do this”, instead of “Gee, I’ll try to do this, but you never know”?

Did Bush give detailed, specific plans when he was running for president in 2000? Did Bush say that he will “try” to implement his ideas, but, “Gosh, you never know if I’ll be able to push my agenda through”?

Schwarzenegger, running as a Republican mind you, gave **no ** concrete plans as to how he was going to save California. He just kept giving vague ideas about how he would do it. And he got elected.

What on earth is the point of this thread? That Kerry is the first candidate to say he has plans without giving details on those plans, and/or that he is the first candidate to speak with certainty about implementing his plans? Cause he isn’t the first and also not the last.

[Aeschines]

@Starving Artist

Yeah, there’s a big difference. That is precisely why he says he has a plan instead of a goal. He knows there’s a difference, and so do you.

Now, good sir, I know that you’re smart enough to know that politicians speak in “politicianese.” Plan, goal–are you really getting that hung up on the semantics?

[Starving_Artist]

@Polerius

Did Bush give detailed, specific plans when he was running for president in 2000?

Not that I recall. Nor did he claim he did. (And therein lies the rub with regard to Kerry.)

@Polerius

Did Bush say that he will “try” to implement his ideas,

Most likely.

@Polerius

but, “Gosh, you never know if I’ll be able to push my agenda through”?

Of course not. Nor is that what I’m saying Kerry should do. There’s nothing wrong with saying you’ll work toward certain goals. There is something wrong with telling people you have specific plans to accomplish them when no such plan could possibly exist.

@Polerius

Schwarzenegger, running as a Republican mind you, gave **no ** concrete plans as to how he was going to save California. He just kept giving vague ideas about how he would do it. And he got elected.

Again, the problem isn’t that he gave no concrete plans. The problem lies in the claim that you have a concrete plan when you don’t. I don’t recall this being the case with Schwarzenegger.

@Polerius

What on earth is the point of this thread? That Kerry is the first candidate to say he has plans without giving details on those plans, and/or that he is the first candidate to speak with certainty about implementing his plans? Cause he isn’t the first and also not the last.

I’d be interested to know what gave you the impression anyone here is contending Kerry was the first to do this. And secondly, what’s the point of the question? You seem to be saying, “Sure, he’s selling these people this piece of shit car and making it sound like a Cadillac, but that’s what all car salesmen do! You’re making it sound like he’s the first car salesman to ever lie to anybody!”

[Starving_Artist]

@Aeschines

Now, good sir, I know that you’re smart enough to know that politicians speak in “politicianese.” Plan, goal–are you really getting that hung up on the semantics?

And you, good sir, are correct. I do know it, and that’s what I’m criticizing here. However, you are attempting to make it sound as if it were a verbal case of it being six of one and a half dozen of the other. This isn’t the case and you and I and John Kerry know it.

He’s attempting to influence people to vote for him on the basis that he has all these “plans” to solve virtually all the country’s problems, but so far as I can tell from anything he’s ever said (and even then only after being pinned down), these “plans” are no more than goals. There is no plan (that he will talk about) as to just how he knows for sure that these goals are going to be reached. But this certainly doesn’t stop him from claiming he has such plans and deliberately working to give the impression that his goals are as good as done if only he’s elected. And this simply isn’t the case, as you and his other supporters here have acknowledged.

[Polerius]

@Starving Artist

“Sure, he’s selling these people this piece of shit car and making it sound like a Cadillac, but that’s what all car salesmen do! You’re making it sound like he’s the first car salesman to ever lie to anybody!”

If Joe and Bob are both car salesmen, and they both engage in the same behavior, it is either hypocritical or stupid to accuse just Joe of this behavior.

Let’s see what “Bob” promises

On September 2, 2004, in New York City, President George W. Bush accepted the Republican nomination for President. In his address, he promised to build on the accomplishments of his first term by building a safer world and more hopeful America for our workers, families, and children. Over the next four years, **President Bush will create ** new opportunities for American workers. He will help every family adjust to the challenges of a changing world. …

Chapter1:
Creating Opportunity for American Workers

• Reforming America’s High Schools: **President Bush will provide ** $250 million annually to extend state assessment of student reading and math skills.
• Jobs for the 21st Century Initiative: President Bush will provide $500 million for Jobs for the 21st Century, which will help educate and train high-skilled American workers in schools and community colleges.
• Tax Reform: President Bush will work to make the tax code simpler for taxpayers, encourage saving and investment, and improve the economy’s ability to create jobs and raise wages.
• Opportunity Zones: **President Bush will create ** new Opportunity Zones, which will encourage public and private investment and provide priority consideration for Federal benefits to communities that are under economic hardship.

Do these things look like plans or goals to you? Do you think they “know for sure that these goals are going to be reached”? Do they use language to “deliberately give the impression that his goals are as good as done if only he’s elected”?

[Starving_Artist]

@Polerius

Do these things look like plans or goals to you?

Why, yes…with the exception of the tax reform statement in which he says he will “work” to make the code simpler, etc. The rest sounds exactly like what I would expect to hear in terms of someone running for office. I haven’t heard anything that even comes close to this kind of specificity coming from Kerry.

@Polerius

Do you think they “know for sure that these goals are going to be reached”?

No, and they aren’t making vague statements that they have a plan that will accomplish them, either. They are stating what they believe, and what they intend to do and/or try to accomplish. You have selected an excellent example of exactly what I think Kerry should be doing (if he really had specific plans, that is).

@Polerius

Do they use language to “deliberately give the impression that his goals are as good as done if only he’s elected”?

No. Some things they say he’ll do, some things they say he’ll work toward, and other times they say he’ll “press for” or “support” certain goals. I see no problem whatsoever with this…and I hear nothing at all coming from Kerry that is even remotely resembles this. All he says is I have a plan for this; I have a plan for that; I have a plan for the other thing. Well, tell us about 'em, John!

Let me try to make the distinction this way. If you came into a lot of money and were interviewing money managers to take care of it for you, would you want someone who sounds like Bush in the material you quote, saying things like “I’d support investment in such and so for this reason, and I think you should do this and that over here with some of it, and then it would be a good idea to invest this portion of it in this venture” or would you want someone like Kerry who says “You deserve someone who can and will take good care of your money! I have a plan that will set you on the right course. With my plan you’ll never have to worry about how your money is being invested. Just leave it up to me, I know what to do.”

And so then, under this little scenario, you say “Well, that’s all well and good, but just how are you going to go about accomplishing these things?” And then he says “By not doing what the other guy is doing! Under his management the fund did this and that (which may or may not be true, and/or the whole story), and such and so happened…and that, my friend, is wrong! I will never handle your money in such an irresponsible way!”

So then you say, “Okay, how will you handle it?” And he says, “According to my plan we will accomplish college for your children, a new car for you and your wife every year and a three million dollar home paid off in only five years, and you can retire by the age of forty!”

So then you say, “Okay, but how will you accomplish this?” And he says, “By putting my plan in action, I would…”

In other words, “yada, yada, yada,” ad infinitum, with no real specifics to let you know that he knows what he’s talking about, or giving you the oportunity to think for yourself what kind of job he’d do. Instead, it’s just “Trust me, because I know what to do!”

Would you turn your money over to someone like that?

[Polerius]

@Starving Artist

…

Yes, you’re right.

[Aeschines]

@Starving Artist

He’s attempting to influence people to vote for him on the basis that he has all these “plans” to solve virtually all the country’s problems, but so far as I can tell from anything he’s ever said (and even then only after being pinned down), these “plans” are no more than goals. There is no plan (that he will talk about) as to just how he knows for sure that these goals are going to be reached. But this certainly doesn’t stop him from claiming he has such plans and deliberately working to give the impression that his goals are as good as done if only he’s elected. And this simply isn’t the case, as you and his other supporters here have acknowledged.

I have no argument with this. I wish also that politicians would skip the BS rhetoric and speak plainly. But Kerry is no worse than other politicians; in fact he seems better and more honest with his words.

Are you claiming that he’s more full of shyte than Bush? I will emphatically deny that. I think Bush manages to combine idiocy and deceit in his pronouncements in a way that is quite amazing.

[Aeschines]

@Starving Artist

Let me try to make the distinction this way. If you came into a lot of money and were interviewing money managers to take care of it for you, would you want someone who sounds like Bush in the material you quote, saying things like “I’d support investment in such and so for this reason, and I think you should do this and that over here with some of it, and then it would be a good idea to invest this portion of it in this venture” or would you want someone like Kerry who says “You deserve someone who can and will take good care of your money! I have a plan that will set you on the right course. With my plan you’ll never have to worry about how your money is being invested. Just leave it up to me, I know what to do.”

So let me get this straight. The first money manager has a reputation, nay, an veritable brand reading “incompetent” on his forehead, but he gives me a more or less detailed plan. The second manager is vague but has no such record of failure.

The second manager, i.e. Kerry, is the obvious choice.

[Starving_Artist]

@Aeschines

I have no argument with this. I wish also that politicians would skip the BS rhetoric and speak plainly. But Kerry is no worse than other politicians; in fact he seems better and more honest with his words.

Well, perhaps it seems that way to you because there is so little content to his words. It’s easier to appear honest when all you’re doing is claiming you’re better than the other guy and you would do things differently, but you’re not saying anything specific about that difference that can scrutinized.

@Aeschines

Are you claiming that he’s more full of shyte than Bush?

I am indeed.

@Aeschines

I will emphatically deny that.

As is your right. I know reasonable people can look at the same thing and come to completely different conclusions.

@Aeschines

I think Bush manages to combine idiocy and deceit in his pronouncements in a way that is quite amazing.

And I would emphatically deny that.

But since you bring it up, why is it that if Bush is anywhere near the idiot that so many claim, he seems to be able to hold his own in debates with Kerry, who is supposed to be such an intellectual? One would think if Bush were really that much of a dolt, Kerry could run rings around him bringing up things he didn’t know, or couldn’t remember, or would get mixed up on, or just plain couldn’t figure out. But no…the only real criticism you hear of Bush is about his demeanor. What’s up with that?

[Starving_Artist]

@Aeschines

So let me get this straight. The first money manager has a reputation, nay, an veritable brand reading “incompetent” on his forehead, but he gives me a more or less detailed plan. The second manager is vague but has no such record of failure.

The second manager, i.e. Kerry, is the obvious choice.

A most amusing but fallacious scenario. The “incompetent” brand on his forhead, in this case, would be visible only to half the population, and they would be in error.

[Starving_Artist]

Uh, sorry…make that forehead.

(I know the correction probably wasn’t necessary, but conservatives quickly learn to cover their tracks around here.)

[BobLibDem]

For openers, Kerry would allow the government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare. Bush’s refusal to allow this is indefensible. Rolling back the tax breaks for the wealthiest will pull in some more money. Ending the tax incentives for companies to relocate overseas will end a drain on the treasury as well as create jobs here, raising tax revenue. And if the books don’t balance, then so be it. We’re still better off than now.