I suppose it makes a difference whether you think attempting to drive the U.S. toward socialism is a good thing or a bad thing. It's all in the point of view.
Kennedy is the archetype of the politician who basks in the light of "accomplishments" that primarily consist of spending other people's money for his own glory. Mandates on industry, massive new social programs dumped on a budget already bent under previous social programs, and all the rest, don't cost him one thing. It's other people that pay to make him a hero.
And like I've pointed out in other cases, how a person behaves in private life has a hell of a lot to do with how they behave in public life. It's called integrity.
Ted Kennedy is one of those who believes that he's better than the peons, which can be expressed in either contempt, or paternalism. In Kennedy's case, it's been both.
Current Events » in reply to No, you didn't say that.
Performance
The whole thread (23 posts)
- Kennedy outlines how the Democrats would handle Iraq.