Kerry's Speech

Suncho · Post by **Suncho** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:40 pm

Who watched it? I thought it was really solid. He even plugged his website: http://www.johnkerry.com.

At one point he accidentally said he'd add 40,000 special forces in order to conduct terrorist operations. =P

At the end there was a problem with the balloons and for some reason the balloon coordinator guy left his mic on and you heard him say "jesus christ where are the f*cking balloons" live on CNN. =P

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:43 pm

Suncho wrote:I thought it was really solid.

Did he actually state any positions?

Suncho · Post by **Suncho** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:44 pm

Of course! He talked about his plans for health care, his plans for iraq, his plans for taxes, and his plans for stem cell research.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:51 pm

What is his plan for health care?

Suncho · Post by **Suncho** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:17 pm

Affordable, high-quality health care will keep our families healthy, our businesses competitive, and our country strong.
Over the last three years, family premiums have increased by more than $2,600 and prescription drug prices have grown four times faster than inflation. These skyrocketing costs have hurt our economy and forced many families into bankruptcy.

We deserve a president who understands that in America, regular check-ups shouldn't empty family checkbooks - a president who will put people ahead of insurance and drug companies.

John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to address soaring premiums and cut Americans a break. Their plan will lower family premiums by up to $1,000 a year, cut waste from the system, lower the cost of prescription drugs to provide real relief to seniors, and use targeted tax cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every child. And because John Kerry and John Edwards believe that everyone's health is equally important, he will provide all Americans with access to the same coverage that members of Congress give themselves.

To make affordable health care a right - not a privilege - for every American, John Kerry and John Edwards will:

Cut Your Premiums
John Kerry and John Edwards will cut family premiums by up to $1,000. That's $1,000 in real savings people can use to buy groceries, pay the bills, and save for their children's future. And that will mean more jobs and more competitive American businesses.

Cover All Americans With Quality Care
The Kerry-Edwards plan will give every American access to the range of high-quality, affordable plans available to members of Congress and extend coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every American child. Their plan will also fight to erase the health disparities that persist along racial and economic lines, ensure that people with HIV and AIDS have the care they need, end discrimination against Americans with disabilities and mental illnesses, and ensure equal treatment for mental illness in our health system.

Provide Affordable Prescriptions
The Kerry-Edwards plan will reduce prescription drug prices by allowing the re-importation of safe prescription drugs from Canada, overhauling the Medicare drug plan, ensuring low-cost drugs, and ending artificial barriers to generic drug competition.

Cut Waste And Inefficiency
Today, approximately 25 percent of health care costs are wasted on paperwork and administrative processing. The Kerry-Edwards plan harnesses American ingenuity to cut waste, save billions, and take new steps to ensure patient privacy.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:31 pm

I'm hearing him say "we have a plan that does these things"... does he give any details about what that plan entails, or how much it will cost? Cuz I mean... I'm all for a plan that costs less, covers more people better, and cuts waste. I'm also for a car that gets 500 mpg, has room for 8 passengers, and costs $325 to buy new. Both are easy to talk about -- but neither are easy to implement.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 11:11 pm

Ditto what Lothar said...

I love this:
"Today, approximately 25 percent of health care costs are wasted on paperwork and administrative processing. The Kerry-Edwards plan harnesses American ingenuity to cut waste, save billions, and take new steps to ensure patient privacy."

He's going to use government to cut administrative and paperwork costs?!?

And he's going to "cut premiums by $1000"...I didn't know I was paying government for my healthcare?!?!
If he can explain that one without lying I'll vote for him!

The only actual change he offers to detail in his whole speech is the re-importation/generic drug barriers thing, and that may be a good thing. Props to him there assuming he can do it.

Genghis · Post by **Genghis** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 12:05 am

He was more specific than Schwartzenegger (and things of that nature),

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 12:39 am

Both major parties usually say pretty much nothing whenever given the chance. They state their intended outcome, but rarely a method.

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:07 am

The importation of prescription drugs from Canada is a really big deal. Although I believe the Bush Administration's stance opposes it, it's really the Food & Drug Administration that pushes to maintain the barriers for the good of the domestic drug companies. The FDA has the wacky belief that prescription drugs that work for thousands of Canadians must instantly be dangerous and toxic the moment they cross our borders.

Personally, I think it's all a protectionist scheme where the FDA is being bought off by the big pharmaceutical firms. Much like the USPTO granting patents with prior art left and right (Microsoft issuing over 3,000 patents this upcoming year alone), or the FCC pushing for more corporate mergers in the television industry, the very agencies put into place to defend the people are now working against us.

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:09 am

My only thought was that it was nice to hear a candidate that can flow three or more sentences together without having to break for a smirk.

TheCops · Post by **TheCops** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 9:34 am

i thought he was an android. these 2 have to be the worst choices i can remember for a presidential election.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!! <--- like you can actually accomplish anything politically in a 4 year cycle.

now say it with me: "i'm not stupid john... i don't need slogans i need action. and since neither you or GW provide anything but slogans i'm gonna bang asian women."

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 9:56 am

hence my avatar cops...mindless controlling two puppets made of the same material.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 2:02 pm

cops, you serious about that? A lot can be done in 4 years.

TheCops · Post by **TheCops** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 2:07 pm

only to be reversed years later...

of course i was being overly dramatic and cynical.. it's a personal problem.

android speech never-the-less.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 12:19 am

If Kerry speaks like an android, Bush speaks like Bozo the Clown with 12 cans of the beast in him.

I enjoyed the speach. It made a lot more sense and didnt contain nearly as many blatent lies as the usual Bush speech.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:26 am

So what does that mean? that Kerry's just a better lier than Bush and you dont know your getting hose?

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:36 am

no i think he means it's possible that we won't have a complete idiot in the white house anymore.

Viralphrame · Post by **Viralphrame** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:50 am

Zuruck wrote:no i think he means it's possible that we won't have a complete idiot in the white house anymore.

ROFLMAO.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:26 am

What's so ROFLMAO about an inaccurate generalized blanket statement? Do you get a hard-on every time someone calls President Bush an illiterate monkey?

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 10:02 am

He's certainly no Winston Churchill if that's what you're implying.

TheCops · Post by **TheCops** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 10:09 am

Kyouryuu wrote:He's certainly no Winston Churchill if that's what you're implying.

ROFLMAO

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 4:36 pm

You can't possibly criticize Kerry for making empty promises and not criticize Bush, or any other politician for that matter. They state what they want to do but not the means. Bush does the same thing.

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:28 am

There is yet again a very distinct line between the republican and democrat members of this board.

I watched CNN just before the speech, but since it would air at about 3.30am my time I decided to go to bed. I would have loved to hear it though.

Lothar, I don't keep a close watch on your posts in political topics, but it seems to me that when something non-Bush is brought up you tend to dismiss it without looking into it. You thrashed Moore's film without watching it, you thrash Kerry for a speech you didn't listen to, etc.

Enfin soit..

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:46 am

And you've trashed a country you've never lived in. But I digress.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:18 pm

Heh, you don't need to live in the USA to criticize bush or our political process.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:16 pm

Pierre, I didn't "trash" the speech or dismiss it, I asked a question.

Did he actually state any positions?

Based on the response I got, it seems clear he didn't include a lot of substance in his speech. Notice that nobody has tried to counter that position, aside from Kyouryuu's mentioning that importing drugs from Canada is substantial. Nobody has said "actually, he did give a lot of substantial positions" -- even Kerry supporters are basically saying "you can't blame him for being vague, because everybody does it."

Now, this fits right into the pattern that has been established previously with my trying to understand Kerry. As you (should) know, I've been following the Democratic race for a lot longer than most people here. I've tried to pick up on where each of the candidates are coming from. And the thing about Kerry is that I haven't been able to figure him out at all -- he seems intent on *not* saying anything of substance, be it in a speech or on his website. His plan of action seems to be: don't offend anybody, and hope the people vote Bush out and make him president by default.

If you're curious, here's the full transcript of his speech (there's also a video, if you can stand to listen to him babble for 40+ minutes.) Having read through it and watched part of it (he talks *much* too slowly...) I noticed the following:

He says we should be "stronger at home and respected in the world", but never gives us a real plan to do that. How do we become more respected in the world? How is he going to get other nations to come to the table (and why don't the ~50 nations already working with us in Iraq count?) I remember reading a quote from him a couple days ago that said something along the lines of "I have a plan to bring other nations to the table... but I'm not telling you what it is."

He also makes a ton of not-so-veiled accusations about the Bush administration being filled with lawbreakers and cheaters, and then at the end of the speech he says "Republicans and Democrats must make this election a contest of big ideas, not small-minded attacks."

And through it all, I still can't figure out *what* he intends to do in Iraq. He's stated a lot of admirable goals, but only the tiniest shreds of a plan to reach those goals. He wants the US to be "stronger at home" and "respected abroad". He wants to "immediately reform the intelligence system" and "bring our allies to our side" and "provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology" (didn't he vote against the $87 billion after he voted for it?) and "deploy every tool in our arsenal". He wants to "lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation" -- this coming from the guy who wants to give nuclear material to Iran. And so on...

He does something very clevery in this speech: he says choices are about values... and then he tells us all about the values, without explaining the choices or ideas that will lead to those values being realized. I totally agree with him, being stronger at home and more respected abroad would be a good thing. Having better health care at a lower cost would be a good thing. All of this stuff would be good -- but how does he intend to accomplish it? I'm especially curious about how he'll *actually* get "allies" (I assume he means France, Russia, and Germany) to work with us in Iraq. He keeps saying he will, but he hasn't explained how...

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:17 pm

Birdseye wrote:Heh, you don't need to live in the USA to criticize bush or our political process.

There's a difference between criticizing Bush (everyone in the world has to deal with Bush, he's a global figure) and criticizing America/Americans.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:26 pm

True, not sure how that relates to tri's post though.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:28 pm

"He keeps saying he will, but he hasn't explained how..." - lothar

And you are surprised by this? It's the name of the game of the major politicians. Be as inspecific but positive and overpromise. That way you can offend the least number of people (something usually you have to do when making hard choices).

I just wish you were as critical of Bush as you are of Kerry.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:36 pm

I've been paying attention since long before the Democratic primaries -- and I have some idea where *everybody* stands, except Kerry. That was my major knock on him even when Dean was leading the polls. Kerry takes the standard political "don't say anything of substance" and moves it to a whole new level, way beyond Bush or Gore or Clinton or anyone else I can remember.

This is why I was curious about the "really solid" Kerry speech. I was wondering if he'd actually included some substance, or whether it was just more of the same.

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:44 pm

Tom, first of all, I think you'll agree if I say that the qualities required to become president differ from the qualities required to be president. At this stage of the elections, candidates for the presidency can not supply a tight and detailed roadmap for the four years to come, so if Kerry has been vague until now, he surely hasn't made empty promises yet either.

For every flaw I could post about Bush, you will find two about Kerry, so there's no point in following that route. I haven't seen Kerry's speech yet (thanks to your link, I will), but from what I gathered from the newspapers it helps to get to know the man. His speech to accept the democratic nomination, though important, is a mere formality, so no surprises there.

Also, personally I care more about attitude rather than concrete measures. Observing the way Kerry and Bush talk, what they speak about, and everything else that helps building a general image of them is more important for me to determine which one to vote for. Kerry hasn't four years of being in office for us to get to know his ways. Bush has. We've seen what he does.

From what I've seen, I would trust Kerry a 100 times more with the presidency than Bush. After all, you will never get to know them personally so you have to base your descision on what the media brings you. Kerry identifies some of Bush'es actions as mistakes and seems determined to correct them. He doesn't have to tell me how he's going to do that, I couldn't be the judge of whether it's good or bad anyway (nor could you, by the way).

I have always been so surprised by all the extra credit the Bush administration has been extended. By the americans, by the rest of the world. By congress, as well. The public opinion has a short term memory and they seem to have been taking great advantage of that. If the Bush administration is good at one thing, it's public opinion manipulation.

A lot of things have happened to and with the US in the past four years. Time for a change in authority, I say.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:35 pm

" Kerry takes the standard political "don't say anything of substance" and moves it to a whole new level, way beyond Bush or Gore or Clinton or anyone else I can remember. "

Heh, sometimes I feel like we live in two different worlds. Mr Bush constantly talks in generalities and says "America and the world is safer" in response to practicially everything he does abroad without backing it up with any coherent argument (Iraq).

But perhaps this is a new thread, as I could go on and on about the broad evidenceless generalizations that come out of bush's mouth.

MehYam · Post by **MehYam** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 12:34 am

Birdseye wrote:Heh, sometimes I feel like we live in two different worlds. Mr Bush constantly talks in generalities and says "America and the world is safer" in response to practicially everything he does abroad without backing it up with any coherent argument (Iraq).

That was my thought exactly. As for Kerry, every election the new candidate tends to feel their way around the mic a bit, and sometimes speak in unhelpful or vague terms - even Clinton veered that way (he came off young, inexperienced). WBush was, of course, at the most painful end of this extreme when he first ran. It's partly why I'm still struck in disbelief that he actually won the last one, he looked so out of his element in front of a microphone... and to this day, Bush still thends to the overly general when he speaks ad lib, to the point that many of his sentences don't really say anything at all. The hamsters aren't running fast enough - or at least, you can't blame anyone for thinking that.

You don't have to listen too carefully before you hear it - he'll get that lost look in his eyes, then say something sweeping about the American public's "resolve", then say something bland about how good a job we're doing, somewhere. I wonder if he actually knows what resolve means (no, GW, it's not what happens when the Alka-Seltzer hits the water).

Anyway, this thread was about Kerry... yeah, whatever, you're just going to vote Bush again anyway!

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 4:42 am

MehYam wrote:yeah, whatever, you're just going to vote Bush again anyway!

Yup.

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:16 am

why do you hate America so much Jeff?

Clayman · Post by **Clayman** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 9:53 am

Kerry identifies some of Bush'es actions as mistakes and seems determined to correct them. He doesn't have to tell me how he's going to do that,

Every politician in the country claims to have a solution to fix all of the problems in the status quo. The rhetoric doesn't sway me, I want to know what they plan to do to resolve the issues, and then see them carry it out. One of the worst elements of the US political system is that politicians can break campaign promises with nearly complete impunity. There's no accountability.

I couldn't be the judge of whether it's good or bad anyway (nor could you, by the way).

If we can't be the judge of whether their policies are good or bad why would we vote? Seems to me that's the whole idea, vote for the candidate with better policies.

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 10:14 am

Let me rephrase my thought, then

The american people vote every four years, but once elected the president no longer has to justify his descisions to his voter. There are drastic mechanisms to keep the president in check, but on overall once he's in office he can do pretty much what he wants.

That's why I said you have to vote based on the impression the person makes upon you, not what he says he will be doing once elected. When Kerry says "reforming intelligence services" and he gives you a complete rundown of how he's going to do it, will you be in a good position to judge it? But he doesn't and the problem doesn't present itself.

Suncho · Post by **Suncho** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 10:41 am

Hey look! Kerry and Edwards wrote a 263 page book about their plan for America! You can download it in PDF format!

http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:34 am

I had to stop reading about a third of the way down page 9 when I ran headlong into this paragraph.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration has walked away from more than a hundred years of American leadership in the world and embraced a newâ??and dangerously ineffectiveâ??American disregard for the world.

Now, maybe I learned it wrong in school or maybe I am viewing this statement in the wrong context, but I could have sworn that up until WWII we were legendarily isolationist. That being the case, how could America hold a leadership position in the world when we wanted nothing to do with the world?

While I agree that the Bush administration has taken us into a dangerous direction, to say that they have broken with a tradition that goes back for nearly half or our existence as a country is a bit false in my view.

Kerry's Speech

Kerry's Speech

Re: Kerry's Speech