onthebottom said:
Hey, whoa, not so many details, I was hoping for more meaningless generalities. I hear he'll be nicer to cats too.
OTB
How unusually petty, OTB. Why bother asking a question if you won't be satisfied with any answer? Personally, lacking clarvoiant abilities, I can only endorse Kerry based on his platform, the outline of which I've given - I was too lazy to do otherwise - and which is readily available in some detail on the web. As I've said before, Bush is a tax-cut-and-spend conservative. Kerry's plan includes something in the way of moderation:
From the Washington Post
The largest domestic policy initiative by far is Kerry's health insurance package, estimated to cost between $653 billion and $950 billion over 10 years. It would provide coverage for an additional 27 million people and have the federal government take over a share of the most expensive, or "catastrophic," illnesses for businesses.
Bush has committed even more money -- about $990 billion over a decade -- for making permanent the array of tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003. His more modest ideas for expanding health coverage through tax credits and personal savings accounts would cover about 2.5 million people at a cost of $90 billion.
Under Bush we will continue to see a deficit balloon with no discernable benefit returning to the people who are financing this debt. Committing so much money to tax-cuts while the government remains in debt is plain folly. Kerry's plan is moderately priced - especially once the most unnecessary of Bush's tax-cuts are repealed - and would enact real, though modest, change within a system that needs it. That Kerry will manage the international stage more adroitly goes, I hope, without saying.
Oh, and don't think I didn't notice that you managed to side-step the fact that your favourite magazine has endorsed Kerry. Could your rather unusual expression of disdain be a defense-mechanism against the creeping realisation that your conscience won't forgive you for voting Bush?