February 15, 2004
LINGERING QUESTIONS:
A few questions for John Kerry (George Will, February 15, 2004. Townhall)
In the more than 250 days until Nov. 2, John Kerry can answer questions that linger in spite of, or because of, all he has said so far. Such as: [...]You say the rich do not pay enough taxes. In 1979 the top 1 percent of earners paid 19.75 percent of income taxes. Today they pay 36.3 percent. How much is enough?
You say the federal government is not spending enough on education. President Bush has increased education spending 48 percent. How much is enough? [...]
You oppose immediate termination of U.S. involvement in Iraq, and you opposed the $87 billion to pay for involvement. Come again? [...]
Praising McCain-Feingold restrictions on political contributions, you said: "This bill reduces the power of the checkbook and I will therefore support it." In December you saved your sagging campaign by writing it a $6.4 million check. Why is your checkbook's unfettered freedom wholesome?
You deny that restricting campaign contributions restricts speech. How much of the $6.4 million did you spend on speech -- broadcast messages? [...]
There are 28 more questions where these 28 came from.
Mr. Will is a frequent critic of George W. Bush, but an adult. Who--other than a libertarian or a paleocon--thinks the country would benefit from the Right discplining the President at the ballot box and giving us a Kerry administration? Posted by Orrin Judd at February 15, 2004 09:48 AM
A fiscal conservative?
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at February 15, 2004 10:55 AMOh boy, fiscal conservatives are going to be so happy with President Kerry. Kerry's objection to Bush's education and social security policies is not that they're too wasteful, if I'm not mistaken. But no problem, the rich (except Kerry's wife) are going to pay dearly with higher taxes. That's just another way to balance the budget.
Posted by: Peter at February 15, 2004 11:17 AMThe notion that John Kerry could be the savior of(or even acceptale to) fiscal conservatives and his brethren homo economicus should compel us to investigate what the Dems have been (successfully?) adding to the water, and the (hopefully transient) desire of many to want to drink the Kool Aid.
Kerry's career in congress and the orientation of his core constituencies should be proof positive that he will only step up spending and "invest" even when we are not fighting a war nor trying to kick start a spent economy. A Kerry adminstration will not only increase the cyclical component of the deficit but the structural ones. His attempts to pay for new spending by cutting the military, homeland security, e.g., by exacting an even higher percentage of revenues from the top 1% will fail, as this group will find ways to shelter income, produce less, or both. He will not touch Social Security reform with a ten-foot pole. And that is before we begin to talk about the quasi fiscal impacts of wasteful re-regulation of the economy.
Posted by: MG at February 15, 2004 12:18 PMOJ
I don't think the usual suspects will stay away election day. They may be disruptive now but they can't be that stupid ... can they?
Posted by: Genecis at February 15, 2004 01:06 PMNever underestimate the stupidity and self-destructiveness of a large number of conservatives.
The time to discipline Mr.Bush is in 2006, when not only is Hillary reelected as planned, but the Dems take control of Congress. How Bush deals with that will set the stage for what happens in 2008.
The basic question for conservatives is "Are you comfortable with the prospect of President Kerry making five appointments to the Supreme Court?" By the end of Kerry's first term, all the justices save two will be over 70. If Kerry were elected twice he might make as many as eight appointments.
Posted by: George at February 15, 2004 02:17 PMGenbecis:
Ever read Reason, National Review or The American Conservative?
Posted by: oj at February 15, 2004 02:37 PM