Kerried Away by EJ Dionne, Jr.

[liberalpragmatist]

By E. J. Dionne Jr.

Friday, June 10, 2005; Page A23

Democrats have to end their addiction to the Kerry alibi.

They may be publicly castigating their national chairman, Howard Dean. But wherever two or more Democrats are gathered privately, their instinct is to blame John Kerry first. I am fed up (to borrow Bill Safire's coinage) with the nattering nabobs of negativism who make themselves feel good by trashing Kerry.


This habit is dangerous because dissing Kerry is an easy way for Democrats to evade discussion of what the party needs to do to right itself. By focusing on the past, the Kerry alibi allows Democrats to avoid engaging the future. In 2008, the Democrats could nominate a candidate who combines Harry Truman's toughness, JFK's charm and FDR's gifts of leadership -- and still face many of the problems Kerry confronted. Blaming everything on Kerry as a supposedly elitist, stiff and indecisive Massachusetts liberal is the Democrats' version of cheap grace.

Please understand: I didn't think Kerry was the ideal Democratic presidential candidate in 2004 and don't think he'd be ideal for 2008. I still cringe when the part of my brain prone to nightmares brings back his talk about voting for the $87 billion to finance the Iraq war before he voted against it. Kerry didn't find a clear voice on Iraq until too late and didn't respond quickly enough to the scurrilous attacks of the partisan Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

But saying that Kerry was the Democrats' one and only problem is both an evasion and unfair. The three debates were the only moments in the campaign in which Kerry's fate was entirely in his own hands, and he used them well. Kerry trounced Bush the first time and, I'd argue, beat him in the other two encounters.

(continued)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/09/AR2005060901727.html?nav=mb

[Amonester]

1. The Democrats' one and only problem is

little king george the third reicher (on the "rise" within the have-mores, and failing the ordinary People)

my $0.01



And I am not the only one.




On edit: Maybe it's the "paperless" E-Voting System also (same as first one...)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x130845


He's got a man-date... :grr:

[Amonester]

9. Reading on, maybe the #1 problem is...

the past.

While the real problem is (IMHO) the present (and the future...).

my second cent.

[Southsideirish]

2. We wouldn't be suffering with problem # 1 if Kerry hadn't been so

obsessed in pursuing the wishy washy "undecideds."
Why was he going to republicun podunks and ignoring his base? Where were his torch light parades through Democratic strongholds, his packed arenas with screaming throngs like bush had?
Instead he and Edwards spent too much time with smallish crowds who weren't enthusiastic or passionate (exact opposite of the wild "perfect for the nightly news" bush crowds).

[vi5]

3. I don't think that's true....don't you remember all the pictures...

..of Kerry and Edwards standing in front of massive crowds? There were tons of them circulating on liberal blogs and message boards. I mean breathtaking shots of crowds in the tens of thousands.

The problem was that the mainstream news media didn't see fit to show those or to point out the size of the crowds.

I agree with you as far as pursuing the undecideds but think the crowd thing wasn't an issue at all.

[Nite Owl]

4. I campaigned for Kerry, I

contributed a lot of money but he is the personification of just what is wrong with the dems. They are afraid to speak out strongly and take a stand that is going against the prevailing polls. I'm still waiting for him to say knowing what he now knows he wouldn't have voted for the Iraq War Resolution. It makes him more of the same. He shouldn't have lost, he probably didn't but it should have been so obvious that he would win that they couldn't have taken it.

[fedupinBushcountry]

5. Bingo !!!!

I,I,I,I,I,I..................................., you fit the scenario perfectly.

[Mass]

6. I dont even think they read the editorial

They read Kerry. They jumped.

Too bad the editorial is not about supposed to be about him.

[Nite Owl]

10. I read the article

and I still feel that a lot of the problem was not just Kerry but the same thing that many dems fall into to. It isn't just him but he personifies it. Kerry made mistakes, big mistakes but they are the very same ones that a lot of dems still are making. They don't get it. Look at the problems that they are giving Dean, they can't even back him, they are afraid of being honest and saying something that is true though harsh because they don't like to take the criticism. Kerry and the dems should have known that they were going to make him into an evil liberal but they didn't fight fire with fire.

[pretzel4gore]

7. wasn't dionne one of clinton's worst bashers?

taking everything from a gopig perspective? i recall dionne cursing clinton and the american people for not cursing clinton too...mind you, that was long ago, and bill maher was building a name bashing clinton, as were leno/letterman (who was it said clinton was america's first black president?) it seems the hatred of clinton belied his public service to the better off element of society; if anything clinton sorta betrayed his poor and minority supporters; to the benefit of the dionnes, the brocawcaws, the jennings, leno/lettermans, the mahers and the limbah-humbugs etc...how much of the clinton bashing was nudge/wink racism?)
winning and whining, that's the gopig ideal

[Mass]

8. Well he spends half of the editorial bashing Kerry

and the other half saying people should not bash him. Not exactly the most logical editorial.