The presumptive Dem Presidential nominee continues to promise he will take on "the special interests."
It's hard to take him at his word given this report:
Nicely done, Cabana Boy. Just about what we would expect from a kept man.A Senate colleague was trying to close a loophole that allowed a major insurer to divert millions of federal dollars from the nation's most expensive construction project. John Kerry stepped in and blocked the legislation.
Over the next two years, the insurer, American International Group, paid Kerry's way on a trip to Vermont and donated at least $30,000 to a tax-exempt group Kerry used to set up his presidential campaign. Company executives donated $18,000 to his Senate and presidential campaigns.
Cabana Boy?? Dem presidential nominee??
Apparently I havent been conforming to the proper style here at Reductio Ad Absurdum. I suppose in all my future references to President Bush I should use the term Monkey Boy, and when referring to Republicans I should use the derisive term Repubs. But on second thought, I would rather try and keep the tone of the debate at a higher level if that is possible.
As for the post above, I am always disappointed when a politician I support is caught playing the special interest games that are so common inside the beltway. However, upon closer inspection there appears to have been more to this story than the implied quid pro quo. What was the other side of the story? Be reading a bit further into the piece we find this bit of information:
Kerry's office confirmed Wednesday that as member of the Senate Commerce Committee he persuaded committee chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., to drop a provision that would have stripped $150 million from the project and ended the insurance funding loophole.
The Massachusetts Democrat actually was angered by the loophole but didn't want money stripped from the project because it would hurt his constituents who needed the Boston project finished, spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said.
When the "AIG investment scheme (came) to light, John Kerry called for public hearings to investigate the parties involved and the legality of the investment practices. However, he firmly believed cutting funding for the Big Dig was not the answer," Cutter said.
So the legislation that would have closed the loophole to punish the insurer would have also stripped millions of dollars from the local construction project. So ask yourself, Would Phil Gramm or Kay Bailey Hutchison have done anything differently in this case? Not likely.
And since we are on the subject of <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.... The Center for Public Integrity, </a> I would hope that you would start referencing their work more often. You will find that they have 10 times the number of examples of Bush and the Republicans involved in these kinds of schemes. Bush, after all, is the all-time champ when it comes to raising money from special interest groups with his No. 1 donor being Enron.
[02/05/04 10:49 AM] [Posted by Mike Thomas]
As Cabana Boy goes, if the term fits, well.... although I should admit that I didn't come up with it. Anyway, if a person can't have a little fun with a blog, then why do it?
You are welcome, of course, to call the Prez anything you'd like. Speech is good and plenty of blogs exercise their right to call the Prez names. Some are better than others. :)
And no, I don't expect the Elephants would have necessarily behaved differently than the Donkeys. D.C. insiders are a shameful lot, and most of them become D.C. insiders (maybe Ron Paul is a rare exception?). But I do think Cabana Boy is a big phony when he talks about taking on the special interests for the little people. Come on.
As an aside: Is "Dems" derisive? Or "Repubs?" I would use GOP because it's shorter, but Repubs doesn't offend me. I use Dems all the time, because it's easy to type. The No Left Turns people sometimes use Demos. I don't think either use is derisive. Are Dem(ocrat)s actually bothered by this?
[02/05/04 11:14 AM] [Posted by Kevin]
Is Dems derisive? I guess it depends on the context. As a journalist, I understand the headline writers dilemna in trying to shorten words to fit limited space. I can also understand the convenience for bloggers of using shorthand terms. But combined with Cabana Boy, I guess I took it as a derisive term in this instance.
I suppose there is a bit of jealousy at work here in that Republicans can shorten their name to GOP (Grand Old Party) while the Democrats are stuck with Dems which rhymes with dim (being of low intelligence). A lot of conservatives just drop the whole charade of civility and use the term Dims all the time.
What it really reminds me of is the Republican Partys decision several years ago to stop referring to their opponents by the proper name Democratic Party and start using the shortened Democrat Party instead. Im sure some consultant decided that Democrat Party and Democrat policies sounds more negative than Democratic Party and Democratic policies. Its petty, I know, but it is also an indication of how far political discourse has fallen during this period of a divided electorate and razor-close elections.
But Ill quit harping on these silly semantic issues. This site steers a higher course than many other blogs and that is the reason why I am willing to drop in on occasion and post a contrary opinion.
[02/06/04 10:19 AM] [Posted by Mike Thomas]
HTML will be stripped. URLs will be transformed into hyperlinks.
[b]text[/b] will produce bold text. [i]text[/i] will produce italicized text.
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003