Heinz Kerry rebukes heckler; crowd cheer

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Heinz Kerry rebukes heckler; crowd cheer
147
Mon, 09-27-2004 - 2:10pm
Here's the orginial link: http://9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=36f146a1-0abe-421a-018e-f62f7c8edb48&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

PUEBLO, Colo. (AP) - A group of 600 Democrats crowded the 4H Auditorium at the State Fairgrounds Friday hoping to see for themselves whether presidential candidate John Kerry's wife was as outspoken and sharp-tongued as some have described her.

Teresa Heinz Kerry delivered for her supporters when she talked back to a heckler who implied her husband's a flip-flopper.

During a question and answer session, a young man demanded to know why Kerry voted to give Bush authority to attack Iraq but voted against an $87 billion appropriation bill to support the war effort there.

"Is that the kind of thing he would do as president?," the man asked.

Heinz Kerry sharply asked the man whether he had read the legislation that was voted on.

When he said no, she told him that Kerry had supported $60 billion in military appropriations for Iraq, but would not vote for the full $87 billion because he considered it a "blank check." Kerry was one of 11 Democrats to vote against the bill.

"And we knew they'd already given Haliburton millions in no-bid contracts," she snapped, referring to the company formerly led by Vice President Dick Cheney.

"If you want to say (Kerry) flip-flopped, just say so, don't try to hide," Heinz Kerry scolded.

The young man responsed with chanting "Four more years!" as he walked out of the auditorium. The partisan crowd's cheer of "Six more weeks!" quickly drowned him out.

Roberto Costales of Canon City liked the way she dealt with her heckler.

"Did you notice how she handled that one guy? I bet she doesn't back down from anybody," he laughed.

In appearances here and before a crowd of 1,700 in Fort Collins, Heinz Kerry echoed her husband's views about terrorism, national security, crime, health care and education.

She said the United States needs a different approach in the world.

"The way we live in peace in a family, in a marriage, in the world, is not by threatening people, is not by showing off your muscles. It's by listening, by giving a hand sometimes, by being intelligent, by being open and by setting high standards," she said at the CSU rally.

In Pueblo, Heinz Kerry sounded a similar theme, criticizing the Bush administration for sending warning signals to Iran about developing nuclear weapons.

"There are about 50 countries in the world that have the capability to build nuclear weapons. Are we going to attack them all?" she said.

Gina Maggrett, of Pueblo, liked what she heard.

"(She's portrayed) as this caustic person but I thought she was really warm and intelligent. A lovely person," she said.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 1:09am


I'm well aware of that. You keep saying that no one is ever forced to have an abortion, and I keep explaining to you what I meant by the term. I keep bringing it up in an attempt to explain to you what I meant by it.



Ok, I tried. All I can say is I didn't intend to be patronizing and insulting, I never do. Since you won't point out to me where you think I have been, I can hardly defend myself. But that's certainly your perogative. I'm just very baffled at how "Sorry for the confusion I caused" could be interpreted as being patronizing and insulting, but I can't help the hidden meaning people choose to read into things. I actually think you have been much more patronizing and insulting in your comments about "milk and cookies" women who don't have any brains, but you have yet to reply to that.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-01-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 8:27am
cmfenno: "I find Bush dangerously misleading on many issues, for example: championing an unfair tax cut that has crippled the nation with debt, giving most of us a few hundred bucks while the wealthy benefitted obscenely more from his tax policy. Americans who made over $1 million in annual income got a cut of $112,925 on average, while I got a thousand bucks, and my retired parents got even less."

Ok, this just really makes me mad. Let me tell you something about the "rich" who get so unfairly taxed in this country. My dad spent twenty-five years putting in 14 hour days to get to the point to where he could retire early and enjoy the rest of his life. He provided well for his family, we were always comfortable, but my parents sacrificed a lot for that comfort. They scrimped and saved and stretched every dollar to put themselves in the position to retire in their early fifties. The last two years that he worked my family and I watched and waited, so sure that he would have a heart attack and die before he could retire due to the unbelievable amount of stress that he was under. My dad did not come from money, he earned every cent he ever made through hard work and with a clear view of the American dream driving him on. The year that they retired, my parents were taxed over a million dollars of their hard-earned money. These are not people who live in a mansion and own a collection of vintage foreign cars. My dad has a Chevy pick-up and my mom drives a Buick. We are middle-class people doing the best that we can. So please shut-up about things that you obviously don't understand. Not all of the 2%ers are jet-setting millionaires. It is quite possible that many of them are just average Americans who worked hard and invested well so that they could provide for their families and retire without worry.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:20pm
I know that Dick Morris has spoken about this (although I take what he says with a grain of salt.)

I will do some research to see if I can find anything on this (may take a while).

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:22pm
-- Clarke was not discredited.

Maybe not in fantasyland, but he was discredited by the MEDIA and by his own prior comments.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:23pm
Whenever she sees reporters, she seems to gravitate towards them like she just cannot resist.

If she has so much to say, why doesnt she run for office?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:25pm
I dont know where those facts came from in the post you responded to, but from what I have read, the average person making $1,000,000 annually got a tax cut of roughly $35,000 to $40,000.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 10:45pm
Check it out


The New Yorker:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040906fa_fact


"Most people already know that Bush’s tax cuts favored the rich, but the size of the giveaway was startling. Based on figures contained in a recent study from the Congressional Budget Office, it now appears that about two-thirds of the benefits went to households in the top fifth of the income distribution, and about one third went to households in the top one-hundredth of the distribution.

To put it another way, families earning $1.2 million a year— that is, the richest one per cent in the country—received a tax break of roughly $78,500. Families earning $57,000 a year—middle-income families—got a tax cut of about $1,100.

Even these numbers, though, do not convey the full ambition of the Republicans’ agenda, which potentially involves a historic restructuring of the American system of government. Roughly two-thirds of taxable income is paid to workers in the form of wages and benefits. The other third goes to reward capital, or accumulated savings, in the form of corporate profits, dividends, and interest payments. If Bush’s economic agenda was fully enacted, the vast bulk of these payments wouldn’t be taxed at all, and labor would end up shouldering practically the entire burden of financing the federal government. In a new book, “Neoconomy: George Bush’s Revolutionary Gamble with America’s Future,” Daniel Altman, a former economics reporter for the Times and The Economist, describes what such a system might look like. “The fortunate and growing minority who managed to receive all their income from stocks, bonds and other securities would pay nothing—not a dime—for America’s cancer research, its international diplomacy, its military deterrent, the maintenance of the interstate highway system, the space program or almost anything else the federal government did. Broadly speaking, that fortunate minority would be free-riders.”

Pages