Thursday, July 29, 2004
Did I Mention I Was in Vietnam?
Perhaps one of the stranger things about the Democratic National Convention thus far has been the seeming lack of any sort of discussion, detail, or reflection of Kerry's 20-year career in the United States Senate. Surely voters would like to know more about the legislation the senator has sponsored or supported, debates over bills that history has judged in Kerry's favor, etc. I mean, this is a guy who has devoted his entire life to the Senate; indeed, it's the only career he's ever had. Yet if you listen to the convention speakers, Kerry was just a Vietnam war hero, and then -- *poof* -- fast-forward to present day.
Did Kerry really accomplish that little over the last two decades? Or is the DNC worried/ashamed at what he did accomplish? Even Kerry's own campaign website spends a great deal of time discussing his plans for the future, and whole sections chronicling his Vietnam past, but his entire Senatorial career is distilled into a single, vague sentence: "In the Senate, John Kerry fought to strengthen our economy, improve public education, make health care more affordable, and protect our environment." That's it.
It would be like Bush bragging up his National Guard experience ad nauseum, and then saying, as an afterthought, "oh yeah, and I was governor of Texas for a while and even President the last four years, but that's not important." Does it really make sense to base this election solely on the recent government record of one candidate while completely ignoring the other?
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
Perhaps one of the stranger things about the Democratic National Convention thus far has been the seeming lack of any sort of discussion, detail, or reflection of Kerry's 20-year career in the United States Senate. Surely voters would like to know more about the legislation the senator has sponsored or supported, debates over bills that history has judged in Kerry's favor, etc. I mean, this is a guy who has devoted his entire life to the Senate; indeed, it's the only career he's ever had. Yet if you listen to the convention speakers, Kerry was just a Vietnam war hero, and then -- *poof* -- fast-forward to present day.
Did Kerry really accomplish that little over the last two decades? Or is the DNC worried/ashamed at what he did accomplish? Even Kerry's own campaign website spends a great deal of time discussing his plans for the future, and whole sections chronicling his Vietnam past, but his entire Senatorial career is distilled into a single, vague sentence: "In the Senate, John Kerry fought to strengthen our economy, improve public education, make health care more affordable, and protect our environment." That's it.
It would be like Bush bragging up his National Guard experience ad nauseum, and then saying, as an afterthought, "oh yeah, and I was governor of Texas for a while and even President the last four years, but that's not important." Does it really make sense to base this election solely on the recent government record of one candidate while completely ignoring the other?
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
