...what could have been. (Count me as a vote that a Kerry/McCain team would have won running away, and might possibly have been a halfway decent Presidency -- but if pigs had wings, they probably still couldn't fly.)
But one thing that we can know, or at least can ask about, is why Kerry, or his people, didn't say anything about this at the time?
The MSM take on the whole thing (which was the RNC/Bushbot take of course) was that Kerry had tried to woo McCain, and failed, signifying his weakness, the weakness of the Dem field, the value of McCain, etcetcetc. It was an integral part of the MSM assault on the Kerry campaign -- so WHY did the Kerry campaign permit this to go unchallenged?
Of course, this is like asking why they didn't fight the SwiftBoatLiars, why they let the Repukes play them into not making the Democratic Convention a non-stop indictment of all the failures of the Bush administration ("O, we can't go NEGATIVE! We can't let this descend into a HATEFEST!" You mean like the Republican convention a few months later? Cause we see how much that turned off the voters... Yeah, voters clearly hate hatefests.)
PUNKS! Can somebody remind me please why Bob Shrum, or any of those wretches, still merits the time of day from any Democrat?
How is $20 a day possible? I thought sub-minimum wages were legal only for jobs where tips were presumptively part of the pay, or for certain agriculture jobs that were exempted from min-wage laws?
If the current Federal min is $5.15, a 7-hour "day" (kept short to keep employees from being eligible for full-time benefits) would gross about $36, and $20 is 56% of that. Ain't no way that the full federal, state, and local tax withholding could add to 44%.
Are these people all working 5-hour "days"? Something's not ading up here.
Not that this affects the central issue of the story, of course, which is completely reprehensible -- and makes for some excellent questions for our crusading "liberal" media to pose the "compassionate conservative" Texass pols, the local "Christian" leaders, "values voters," etcetcetc.
Coulter "jokes" about how the Times shoulda been blown up -- and the Times knuckles under to their side. Perhaps there's a point here from which we should be learning? Not that I'm actually suggesting anything; just sayin'
Couldn't agree with Waxwing more. Dr Dean was right, too - those guys in the pickups with the gun racks and the rebel-flag bumper-stickers SHOULD be voting for us. Those Democratic "leaders" that want to write off all those people who should be on our side -- but have written US off, because we should be on their side, and have not been -- are the ones responsible for the long trail of losses that we've suffered. Time for those to come to an end.
There's too much that normal Americans need from their government that neither party has been giving them for too long. If we lose the opportunities that this administration have given us, then we really deserve to lose.
I don't get it either -- if it were a stock, I'd buy it. If it were a network, I'd watch it. If it were a cable channel, I'd buy it. I've been blowing that horn on various blogs from time to time for years.
Are Dem investors REALLY that stupid and feckless that there's NOBODY that sees the yawning chasm in the marketplace and wants to get rich filling it?
Was it Lenin who said a capitalist would sell you the rope to hang him with? I don't get why there isn't even one rich right-wing nutcase recognizing that they could make a bloody fortune selling us lefties what we want to buy. It's not like ONE station would counteract ALL the others put together.