Kerry’s “Benedict Arnold” Money
John Kerry has a name for companies and business executives who move jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes – “Benedict Arnolds.” The Massachusetts Democrat, who is close to locking up his party’s presidential nomination, vows that, if elected, he will come down hard on these traitors to working America.
Meanwhile, Kerry finds himself in the awkward situation of having to explain why he has accepted money – lots of it – from some of the same companies and executives he denounces as Benedict Arnolds on the campaign trail.
Act one way . . . whine another.
Is it impossible for this guy to find a position and stick to it? I mean, really really stick to it. Walk the walk while you’re talking the talk. I have YET to find an issue that this man hasn’t waffled on. On all the issues, Kerry is as floppy as a fish out of water – gasping for air.
These corporations are BAD because they outsource — they are traitors to this country, they’ve betrayed their nation – - – but their money sure is GREAT.
Does Kerry think no one will notice? Well, I mean – besides the liberal media?
This is becoming laughable!
I don’t approve of offshoring by any means, but Benedict Kerry should rethink his vocabulary of disparaging remarks, methinks…
How’s getting tougher on business going to convince business not to offshore? I mean once you go down the path John Kerry is going down we will see WalMart picking themselves up and moving. We’ll have to go to Puerto Rico for our Groceries from now on.
AG- didn’t you just get a lecture about calling someone Benedict Arnold?
I suspect you refer to me ‘peejz’.
I lectured no one. I simply pointed out the difference between the historical Benedict Arnold and the convenient application of his name in a modern context.
Were you to read a biography of the real Benedict Arnold you’d undoubtedly learn a great deal about the history that formed our nation. There are several good ones out there.
A revisionist’s history undermines a valid argument IMHO.
That’s all I meant. Clearer now?
Well, heck, there’s so much revisionist history out there that I don’t think anyone will be able to keep it straight. I mean, does anyone who didn’t live through it really know about, say, the presidency of JFK or the circumstances surrounding his death? I didn’t live through it myself, but my parents did, so I trust them as sources far more than I trust the consummately changing news reports “uncovering new information” (read: taking yet another spin).
In all fairness, I suppose you could easily say that revisionists of history literally come from both the Right and the Left. No wonder there are people out there who stop watching the news to save their sanity!
Peejz — don’t worry.
I’m not “giving in to the Dark Side” — just acknowledging that there’s margin for error on both sides. I think the Left just has a larger market in the media where revisionist history is concerned, what with all of the networks and major publications at their disposal.
I can assure American Girl that there are scholarly biographies of many of the Founding Fathers. If you’d like a “good read” try “Benjamin Franklin: Am American Life” by Walter Isaacson. It’s a real page turner if you are interested in ready a realistic evaluation of a human being rather than the encapsulated versions of these people most of us are only cursorily exposed to in school.
Also there’s a fairly recent biography of John Adams by David McCullough which is superb.
I simply inform you of your options since you appear to have a rather keen interest in American history and I would encourage you to read well-researched accounts of our nation’s inception and growth formulating your own opinions without bias from anyone (Right or Left).
And with reference to the “dark side”… must you always assume that one is either “for you” or “against you”?? It’s tedious and promotes the very thing you profess to despise about your dreaded liberals.
In this age of marginalization of the various factions in this country don’t you suppose the ‘greater good’ would be served more advantageously by making an attempt to find in your nature some piece of you that’s conciliatory rather than divisive?
Just a thought mind you.
Please see “reading” for “ready” in above post.
Thanks.
You know, I do believe we have a copy of David McCullough’s “Truman.” I can’t remember whether or not we have “John Adams,” but I do remember hearing about it. He is indeed quite a historian.
As for my mentality of being “for me or against me,” well, I’m pretty much against the idea of compromise of my principles, and that is where that comes from. I am, admittedly, something of, well…
…a butthead.
Which you’ve probably figured out by now, lol, but generally speaking, usually once I pick a side and form an opinion, I am loyally devoted to that opinion because I don’t want to become compromised or confused.
I see we share personality traits after all eh AG??
You could certainly say that, yes.