Kerry FIGHTS BACK bush* accusations of special interest money

[diamond14]

Kerry video..."More than Anyone"




watch the entire video linked on this web page....
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0214c.html

here's the transcript....

“More Than Anyone"

Announcer: "He’s taken $3.2 million from big oil and gas companies… and let America’s worst polluters re-write our environmental laws. "

"He’s taken $1.4 million from drug companies… and pushed through a $140 billion giveaway for the pharmaceutical industry. "

"He’s taken $8 million from big banks and investment firms… and just told us that “outsourcing” jobs to other countries is good for America. "

"Enron has been his single biggest contributor – over $600,000. "

"Who’s the politician who’s taken more special interest money than anyone in history? '

"The same one who’s attacking John Kerry’s record because he can’t defend his own.'

John Kerry: "I’m John Kerry and I approved this message because together, we can defeat George Bush and the powerful special interests."

[HFishbine]

1. Reminds me of George Bernard Shaw anecdote

One evening, at a fancy dinner party, George Bernard Shaw found himself seated next to a beautiful lady of the aristocracy. "Madam," he asked her, "Would you sleep with me for a million pounds?"

"I believe I would," she replied.

"Would you sleep with me for twenty quid, then?" Shaw asked.

"Dear sir! What kind of woman do you think I am?"

"Madam, we have already established that. We are merely quibbling about the price," replied Shaw.

It looks like we are headed for a debate over who is the biggest corporate whore.

[diamond14]

2. such pro-bush* comments...surprising to read on this board...

IMO, you meant "George W. Bush" rather than George Bernard Shaw....your implication is that Kerry is doing favors in return for money...like bush* does....bush* sells our environmental regulations to the highest bidder, sells our MEDICARE program to his donors...sells OUR children to DIE in bush* war....

John Kerry has many small donors, AND JFK has never done 'favors' for donors....

[HFishbine]

3. "John Kerry has many small donors, AND blah, blah, blah...."

That would be a solid argument, if it were true. Unfortunatley, it repeats a troublesome trend I'm seeing. That people are projecting what they would like to be true about a candidate onto Kerry without checking the facts.

When it comes to small donors, Kerry has received contributions from 13,442 donors who averaged $1,111.00. Compare this to Dean's 24,162 donors who averaged $540. Who's being funded by the fat cats?

http://www.fundrace.org/moneyindex.html

To maintain that Kerry has never done favors for contributors, is just whistling in the dark. We can talk about it now, or we can watch it blindside Kerry in September.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=694&u=/ap/20040204/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_big_dig_1&printer=1

[Mz Pip]

5. So the only

viable candidate is one who only takes small donations? Did Dean give back all of his donations that were over $1000 or are his $1000+ donations less "special" than other candidates? $1000 donations can hardly be called "fatcat" donations.

I'm sure Dean would be thrilled if he had more $2000 donations, but since he doesn't he has imply sinister motives to Kerry's contributors. Geez, this is just getting silly.

MzPip
:dem:

[HFishbine]

11. I didn't make that claim

I merely pointed out that one is operating under delusional thinking if one has the impression that Kerry has lots of small donors and has never traded favors for contributions. That's all.

[diamond14]

15. yes, you did....

.

[HFishbine]

16. No, I didn't.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

18. If you think Dean doesn't have bundlers, you are naive

[BootinUp]

4. Thank you for giving me a chance

To launch my first defense of John Kerry. As you know I am a staunch Clark supporter, but I am even more committed to a Democratic President.

Kerry has been a legislator since I think 1984. Before that he was a district attorney, he also a protested a horrible war, and he was a true war hero fighting for his country because WE asked him to. John Kerry has a record we can all be proud of as Americans.

I am quite confident that the record will show Kerry performed his duties as a Massachusetts Senator to the highest standards. It is a fact of life that he must interact with corporations as well as citizens in performing his job.

My current opinion is that Bush looses this comparison hands down, I think it is offensive for you to call him a corporate whore, and you presented no evidence at all. Please submit your evidence or retract that smear.

[diamond14]

6. agree...it's just a smear....too many here are just smearing Kerry

and IMO, it is a thinly-veiled attempt to re-select shrub....

[HFishbine]

12. Please see post #3 (nt)

[fjc]

9. Well then, which "whore" are you gonna support?

[Cheswick2.0]

7. wow, this is his denial?

He isn't the nominee yet. Why should I care if he has taken less special interest money than bush when he has taken more than every one else?
That money is not where he is going to lose to bush. He is going to lose for a million other reasons.

[BootinUp]

8. Isn't it true that much

of this "special interest" money Kerry is accused of taking is actually from liberal/left leaning groups? I sincerely doubt you can claim he is a corporate whore as one of our fellow DU'ers did above, or will you?

[HFishbine]

13. You tell us

If you're supporting Kerry, shouldn't you know whether or not it's true that most of his special interest money comes from liberal groups?

[BootinUp]

17. Seems we both need to bone up on the facts

In the mean time I consider you charges to be baseless.

[HFishbine]

19. Mine was a rhetorical question

I know the answer. It seems as if one of us has chosen to support a candidate with some facts unknown.

Furthermore, providing sources for "claims" (post #3) is not baseless.

[BootinUp]

20. I looked at your claims

I saw nothing to be alarmed about, Kerry has supporters who contribute to his campaign. :shrug: what politician doesn't. I still don't see the evidence of special favors that this whole issue alludes to.

The quid pro quo case on the Mass State road program is not really what you would paint it as. After all it was a program for his constituents and someone had to get paid to build it. The only thing that stinks is the continued effort to smear him with it.

And the whole argument that Dean is more grassroots, with smaller donors is quite an ironic argument to make, considering his record as a moderate Governor with plenty of pro-corporate programs.

[diamond14]

10. "he is going to lose to bush"? NO, YOU are going to lose !

that is the REAL DEAL...

YOUR big-talk here is helping bush* to control OUR government, continue to squat in the WH, implement the DRAFT, destroy OUR environment, sell OUR public lands to cheney/bush* oil and gas interests, and send OUR YOUNG people to their deaths in Iraq...

nasty posts here are certainly helping the shrub...

and if Kerry loses, YOU "lose for a million other reasons"....


go Kerry...beat bush*

http://www.JohnKerry.com

[HFishbine]

14. There are two possible scenarios here

Either:

1) Progressives who may find Kerry unacceptable are of no consequence; that Kerry will win wihtout them, in which case it's ridiculous to even give them the time of day.

or

2) Kerry really can't win without progressives, in which case it's incumbent upon Kerry supporters to shift their support to a candidate who can carry the progressive vote.

[CalProf]

21. How about a third scenario?

In which we actually try citing a fact or two instead of spreading Republican propaganda? Unless you think Nyhart, Pingree, and Claybrook are also corporate whores. (I will admit that in DU's version of Lilliput that is possible...)

Feb. 3, 2004

Kerry Ranks Near Bottom in Senate on Money From PACs and Lobbyists

Statement from Nick Nyhart, Executive Director of Public Campaign Action Fund; Chellie Pingree, President of Common Cause; and Joan Claybrook, President of Public Citizen

According to a Jan. 31 Washington Post story, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is beholden to the very special interests he says he will dismiss from the White House if elected. The Post based its erroneous conclusion on an analysis of the money Kerry has raised from lobbyists while he was a senator.

But the Post paints an inaccurate picture using an arbitrary statistic. A more accurate indicator of whether a candidate has ties to special interests is whether that candidate receives political action committee (PAC) as well as lobbyist money, and if so, how much. An analysis of PAC and lobbying contributions combined shows Kerry is near the bottom in receiving such funds when PAC money is averaged from 1993 through the present and lobbyist money is averaged from 1990 through present. Further, the lobbyist money that Kerry has taken in the presidential campaign is less than 1 percent of his total money raised.

Not only has Kerry historically refused to take PAC money, but his record shows that he been a leader for more than a decade in full reform of campaign financing, advocating for clean public money not only for presidential but also congressional campaigns.

Kerry was the lead sponsor with the late Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) on a measure that would have authorized clean money in all federal congressional elections and was a leader in pressing for congressional public financing in the 1992 and 1993 campaign finance reform bills. Although those bills passed, they were not enacted.

Other Democratic presidential candidates such as former Gov. Howard Dean and Sen. John Edwards also have endorsed campaign finance reform. Dean has endorsed public financing and reform of the presidential public funding system. Edwards played a leadership role in the effort to pass the McCain-Feingold bill and has endorsed reform of the presidential public funding system. President Bush has not endorsed either.

link: http://www.publiccitizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1639

[HFishbine]

22. So

You agree with #1 then.

[diamond14]

23. so, reTHUGlican message is not being well recieved here....

and that is SOOOOOOOOO important...

[The Magistrate]

25. The Question, Mr. Fishbine, Is Much More Simple

It is this: how many "progressives" are willing to be open tools of reaction come November, by acting in a way they know will benefit the criminals of the '00 Coup?

It is nonsense for the handful of purist luminaries on this forum to pretend, to others or to themselves, that they reprersent the great mass of left and progressive persons in this country. That pretense is utterly false. The people who argue against the wrecker's course here with you are leftists, and progressives, and you know that to be true.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[The Magistrate]

24. Nonesense, Mr. Cheswick

The "more than anyone else" canard refers to funds from a very narrow source; personal contributions from registered employees of lobbying firms. It has about the same relation to the business of funding campaigns as shaking down your couch for change has to your grocery shopping. The organization who's report was tortured into this distorted claim has denounced it. As a regular visitor to this forum, Sir, you must know that. You are, of course, free to retail bumper-sticker slogans featured in Republican campaign efforts, that bear no more relation to truth than soy burgers to a good fist-full of ground sirloin, though not without some loss in credibility and respect....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"