These are good questions. Although, I don't think it is fair to put the word "unconstitutional" in Bush's mouth. Also, the Democrats controlled the senate for most of the first 2 years. Still, the question about spending is a very valid one.

I am not sure that the question of spending is a valid one with Bush's last term. He had a number of expenses that were out of the ordinary; like rebuilding the Pentagon, aid to NYC for the rescue and clean up of the WTC attack, military operations against two countries, increasing intelligence assets, setting up the Department of Homeland Security, increased security around the country, etc. I am not sure how much those items added to the increase in spending that Bush is blamed for but I would guess it is a large part. That would be an interesting stat. to have.

I am not sure that the question of spending is a valid one with Bush's last term.

I am not sure how much those items added to the increase in spending that Bush is blamed for but I would guess it is a large part. That would be an interesting stat. to have.

And that is exactly why that is a good question. If Bush can offer a reasonable response then that would tell voters a lot.

These questions are not intended to be rhetorical (at least not completely). Good, truthful answers to these would go far towards informing Americans what policies these men really support.

The full version of the question notes thst spending not related to defense or homeland security has increased at the largest rate since Johnson adjusted for inflation.

For reference, here's the full question:

— You also said in 2000 that you trust Americans to spend their own money more than you trust the government. But during your first term, with your party in control of both houses of Congress, you’ve spent more taxpayer dollars (adjusted for inflation) than Bill Clinton (search), Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon — more than every administration since Lyndon Johnson (search). That’s true no matter how we measure “spending.” Even when we adjust for defense and homeland security spending, you’re still the biggest spender in four decades. You’ve increased funding to such non-conservative causes as the National Endowment for the Arts, the Departments of Health and Human Services and Education, the Peace Corps, and of course the prescription drug benefit (which your administration pushed through Congress based on misleading information about its cost). Given your professed views on government spending, how do you justify growing government faster than any president in 40 years?

Good catch Madine and vincible.

I would be willing to bet that most overseas Heinz factories are much like most overseas GM plants, sure they don't employ Americans, and aren't built in American territory, but they also don't sell to americans, they sell to the local markets. Oof, I don't like this election, I don't really like either candidate.

I would be willing to bet that most overseas Heinz factories are much like most overseas GM plants, sure they don't employ Americans, and aren't built in American territory, but they also don't sell to americans, they sell to the local markets.

That is most likely, I think. And if that is the case then that would be a good response to that question, but I would want to see figures supporting it.

Oof, I don't like this election, I don't really like either candidate.

Welcome to my world.

Snopes knows everything

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

Relevant quotes:

Although Senator Kerry has been critical of the Bush administration for rewarding "Benedict Arnold CEOs" who move "profits and jobs overseas," the above-quoted attempt to link Kerry (through his wife) with the very outsourcing he decries is flawed in two major ways. First off, Teresa Heinz Kerry does not "own the Heinz Corporation" — she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of the H.J. Heinz Company, nor does she own anything close to a controlling interest of the company's stock...

Moreover, the Heinz Company's operations are not an example of the type of outsourcing that is currently a hot political issue (i.e., sending out work to offshore companies to provide services which a company might otherwise have employed its own staff to perform). Heinz is a U.S.-based global business which sells its products in dozens of other countries, and like other food companies it has to localize some of its production at factories located in its foreign market areas...

As the H.J. Heinz Company notes, well over half its sales come from foreign markets, and it therefore operates overseas facilities to serve those markets:

Currently, 60% of the sales of the H.J. Heinz Company are outside the United States and to accommodate those customers by providing facilities closer to those markets, the company maintains a number of overseas facilities that provide products for consumers in those markets. This allows Heinz to pack the freshest ingredients, tailor its recipes to local tastes and deliver the finished products in a timely and efficient manner. In the United States, Heinz makes its flagship ketchup in factories in Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and Stockton, California.

First off, Teresa Heinz Kerry does not "own the Heinz Corporation" — she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of the H.J. Heinz Company, nor does she own anything close to a controlling interest of the company's stock...

Balko never says they control anything. He asks if they would try to influence a change in policy (which is certainly not out of the question for a 4% owner), and if that fails will they sell that stock in favor of other companies.

He also asks:

The Hill newspaper reports that your campaign has accepted $370,000 from the CEOs of companies that heavily outsource jobs to other countries...Will you give back campaign contributions from corporate executives whose companies outsource?

Which has nothing to do with their ownership of Heinz.

Wait... the Heinz factories serve foreign markets, according to Snopes. What's the remaining problem here?

I admit I overquoted, but I tend to try to err in that direction rather than underquoting.

What's the remaining problem here?

The campaign contributions of CEOs of companies that heavily outsource jobs.