George W. Bush's qualifications to be President

crashfrog, I agree with your sentiments except for the tone of this question:

quote:

---

How does Bush expect to run a campaign based just on "anybody but Kerry"?

---

I think it's quite the other way round. Kerry is riding a wave of "anybody but Bush". Kerry needs to go negative and he needs to do it last year. The Bush camp knows what it's doing and it's doing it very well. It's hard to dress up s*it to make it look pretty and smell nice, but they're doing it right before our eyes.Kerry's campaign looks almost bush league (did I say that?) by comparison. It's sad to say but negative campaigning works. Kerry needs to learn that fact right away.

crashfrog says:

quote:

---

Well then you haven't been watching or reading about the RNC, I guess. Or seen Bush's webpage.

---

I've been watching. My point was that Bush IS running a negative campaign. That's what works. Kerry needs to do the same thing if he really wants to win. There's an over-abundance of material for Kerry to use if he'd just use it.Kerry is too reluctant to attack Bush and he's too slow to respond when he himself is attacked. The SBVFT is a perfect example. It took weeks for him to respond to those charges and when he finally did respond he seemed to do so from weakness. I mentioned in another thread that after my old computer crashed I started getting most of my news from NWI and MSNBC. Those seldom-watched networks have done a fair job of scrutinizing the SBVFT ads and pointing out the discrepancies and distortions not only with the actual Naval records but even between the SBVs themselves. Kerry should be on the offensive regarding the SBVs and shouldn't leave it to the media to respond to those ads. Beyond that, he should be pointing out what's wrong with Bush and he should do so with gusto and enthusiasm. If he doesn't, he stands NO chance of being elected the next president.

RAZD says that federal taxes:

quote:

---

...should be on capital gains: if you are worth more this year than last then pay a tax on that basis.

---

I'm not a tax expert so I must concede that your idea might be perfectly sound. I don't see it, though. How would your system work in a time of serious economic downturn, such as in a steep recession or depression?

Rei writes:

quote:

---

Kerry's support for a 50 cents per gallon tax increase on gasoline was A) not for a voting measure, and was only mentioned in floor discussion B) back when gasoline was 1.01$ per gallon, C) would simply move us closer to most of the rest of the world (do you think, of all of the types of taxes possible, that having it on something like gasoline is a bad place for it? Would you rather it be on income or payroll taxes?) and D) is no longer supported given current gasoline prices.

---

I support Kerry and yes, I'd prefer the tax to be levied on income, not gasoline. Gas is almost as necessary to modern life as food. If taxes had been raised 50 then gas prices would be 50 higher today. Much better IMO to levy new taxes on vehicles (such as SUVs) which do not meet fuel efficiency standards.