Kerry is as far-left as it gets in mainstream government. Anything further left would have been 12million+ wasted. I doubt anyone would invest in someone that had no possibility of getting elected. One step at a time.

But aren't we supposed to look past the bias and find the truth?

No problem with that as long as they give some sort of evidence to back up their wild assertions.

The time frame was *exactly* what the issue was.

According to book "My Life" by Bill Clinton his wife did pretty much the same. Clinton was one of greats, IMHO. So that does not make Kerry a possible bad president because his wife decided to take his name recently.

OK people, the part about the Heinze Foundation is at best misleading, at worst false:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/tides.asp

and I quote:

"The reason why is obvious: The charge does not stand up to objective scrutiny. Four facts undercut it completely. First, by legally binding contract, every penny of Heinz’s support to Tides has been explicitly directed to specific projects in Pennsylvania. It cannot legally be redirected and is the exact opposite of fungible.

Second, the Tides Center is a provider of management and administrative services, and we have used it only for those services, not to advance Tides’ grantmaking agenda. Foundations from all across the country-many, like Heinz, with strong centrist agendas-use these services to incubate an array of nonprofit programs. So does the federal government. It is no more accurate to suggest that Heinz supports every one of these programs than it is to suggest that someone who contributes to a specific group through the United Way supports the agenda of every other United Way beneficiary.

Third, the projects we have supported through Tides speak for themselves. They include programs to test the career readiness of area high school students, protect Pittsburgh’s environment and retain young people in our region-hardly an extremist agenda.

Fourth and finally, information about every one of our Tides-related grants is and always has been readily available in our public filings, annual reports and here on our web site. Far from being secretive, we have been consistently open in detailing the nature of our grants to Tides and every other organization we fund."

OK people, the part about the TidesFoundation is at best misleading, at worst false:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/tides.asp

and I quote:

"The reason why is obvious: The charge does not stand up to objective scrutiny. Four facts undercut it completely. First, by legally binding contract, every penny of Heinz’s support to Tides has been explicitly directed to specific projects in Pennsylvania. It cannot legally be redirected and is the exact opposite of fungible.

Second, the Tides Center is a provider of management and administrative services, and we have used it only for those services, not to advance Tides’ grantmaking agenda. Foundations from all across the country-many, like Heinz, with strong centrist agendas-use these services to incubate an array of nonprofit programs. So does the federal government. It is no more accurate to suggest that Heinz supports every one of these programs than it is to suggest that someone who contributes to a specific group through the United Way supports the agenda of every other United Way beneficiary.

Third, the projects we have supported through Tides speak for themselves. They include programs to test the career readiness of area high school students, protect Pittsburgh’s environment and retain young people in our region-hardly an extremist agenda.

Fourth and finally, information about every one of our Tides-related grants is and always has been readily available in our public filings, annual reports and here on our web site. Far from being secretive, we have been consistently open in detailing the nature of our grants to Tides and every other organization we fund."

Before swallowing this stuff whole, read another viewpoint on George Soros: Link

To me anyone that is able to provide $12+million in support for a single election has done enough in that act to disqualify themselves from the system. It is utter abuse.

"Defeating incumbent Republican President George W. Bush will make the world safer by making America weaker -George Soros. (Link)"

'nuff said, imho.

This discussion isn't about Soros, though.

$12 million from an individual is obscene but $200 million from wealthy donors is okay.

I'm totally with Gerry on this article.

"$12 million from an individual is obscene but $200 million from wealthy donors is okay."

So everyone who donated to Bush's election was wealthy? That's an idiotic statement, even for you. Kerry has made over 160 million so far, almost 36 million of that in June alone. Were they all poor widows and orphans donating their gruel? Kerry has no room to talk about donations, that's why he isn't slinging mud. Most of it would stick to him as well.

The point wasn't who donated according to the rules. Soros doesn't just donate legally, though. He funds sites like MoveOn.org and other activities that skirt campaign laws but have a great deal more influence than the traditional campaign.

But it is not John Heinz's money it is her money left to her by a her husband who knew her better than anyone and I, suspect, trusted her judgement

It is only her money because she married into it.  As far as knowing her better than anyone else and trusting her judgement, there would probably never be a single divorce if these things weren't flawed so often.  I find it very hard to believe that Heinz would be pleased by the way his money was being spent.  I wonder if he made her sign a pre-nup.

I don't even care about the rest.  The marriage sounds more like a business merger than anything else.  The fact that Hillary did the same name change trick for political reasons doesn't soften it in any way.  It just seems like you make that decision when you get married.  You either take your spouses name or not.  Why change your mind for false pretenses like 'it will look better politically'.  Kerry and wife just don't seem like "real" people to me.

As far as Clinton taking the name late? I put that in the *same boat*.

"Defeating incumbent Republican President George W. Bush will make the world safer by making America weaker -George Soros. (Link)"

is this statement attributed to soros included in the linked article? 

did soros actually say that...or is it just something ponte imagined?

I find it very hard to believe that Heinz would be pleased by the way his money was being spent.

Jill, I do not see how on earth you can make a statement like this about someone you did not even know? Surely this is more that you disapprove of how she is spending her ex-husbands money.

To me anyone that is able to provide $12+million in support for a single election has done enough in that act to disqualify themselves from the system. It is utter abuse.

So everyone who donated to Bush's election was wealthy?

So at what level of donation to a campaign do you get "disqualified" from the system?

Jill, I do not see how on earth you can make a statement like this about someone you did not even know?

Very easily.  It is an opinion.  Not a statement of fact like "Heinz does not approve of the way his money is being spent."

I didn't know Heinz personally but I have read a bit about his views on business and trade.  Kerry makes such views sound evil.  That is what I drew my opinion from.