I normally adore bartcop and agree with him about 90% of the time, BUT....

[blm]

His constant attacks on Kerry while lavishing praise on the Clintons defy reality.

The Dem convention tone was mostly set by Bill Clinton who was advising MacAuliffe and the Democratic campaigns that the American people don't want to hear negative campaigning against Bush, that the American people would only elect a president and leaders who made them feel hopeful and positive. He also advised them to publicly support anti-gay marriage measures.

Overall, I think Clinton was a pretty good president, but, did it ever occur to people like bartcop that when Kerry worked for 5 years to expose BCCI and had the goods on most of BushInc, that it was Bill Clinton who dropped any further investigations and closed the books on BCCI when the revelations could have stopped the BFEE in their tracks in 1993?

I give Clinton the benefit of the doubt on his motives, because it was a safe guess that the full revelations of the BCCI scandal would collapse the world economy at the time, and Clinton was working to stop that from happening. But, the consequence of that decision was that the BFEE was allowed to exist and FLOURISH to become even stronger and is now ruling most of the entire US government.

The other point about bart's attacks on Kerry is that he praises Hillary Clinton for whatever she does even if it's the exact same thing as Kerry. See, he thinks every move Hillary makes is a brilliant maneuver that positions her to gain strength so some time in the future she will be able to avenge herself against the Republicans.

She has been to Kerry's right on Iraq and hasn't signed on to the DSM senate investigation and yet all the scorn is saved for Kerry who sticks his neck out with alternative plans to hasten our exit from Iraq and is pushing for the senate DSM investigation.

In my view, the few months Kerry had for a general election went great except for the areas where he was specifically advised by Clinton and Clinton's campaign team who told him to stay positive.

Clinton's reputation as a "brilliant" politician is one of the reasons that people give for hanging on his every word, and while most of it is good, I can see how some of it is unworkable in today's world and with today's uber-corporate media.

I still believe the exit polls were right last Nov. and that Kerry won, even while running a pretty positive campaign. But, the disconnect from those who contend that Kerry ran the positive campaign because he wanted to roll over for Bush is just too blatant to ignore. If Kerry intended to roll over for Bush he wouldn't have bothered to win all three debates so decisively.

Kerry ran a positive campaign because he is truly a person who believes in civic propriety and I can't help but think that his campaign believed Clinton was right that the American people WANTED to hear positive messages.

I'm rambling, now, but I just wanted to get this out, because bart's attacks on Kerry are just so over the top and undeserved. Kerry's been a target for GOP hate and dirty tricks for over three decades. Clintons were targeted for half that time. Why bart gives only the Clintons the benefit of the doubt is beyond me.

Excuse the rant.

[amazona]

1. isn't bart originally from Arkansas?

Cut him a little slack, down south we are going to give a little more credit to the Arkansas boy and be a little more skeptical of the Yankee. I don't agree with Bart that Kerry "rolled over," but I always felt the choice of a Yankee candidate was a strategic mistake.


My area of disagreement would be that I don't think Hillary can become Southern by injection, especially since she is a New York Senator. I would like to find an equally qualified Southern candidate, and hopefully not a Senator, such as Clark.

I guess I am saying, while I don't fully agree with Bart's opinion, I can see where he is coming from. I could do without the "pink tutu" image but it is a satire site and expressing disappointment and frustration in a humorous way is part of it.

[blm]

5. Oklahoma, I believe. I also believe Kerry did win while staying a positive

tone and with 80% of the media working overtime protecting Bush.

[LisaM]

21. What, we have to have Southern presidents forever?

When is that going to end?

[Boredtodeath]

2. You need to

Take the log out of your eye before you can help another remove the splinter in theirs.

[blm]

8. I did admit it was a rant...but, I don't see any lies in my post.

.

[Boredtodeath]

12. Ummm, you need to lose some of your Kerry worship

before you can complain about Bart's (supposed) Clinton worship.

No one gives a shit what John Kerry did 20 years ago. The bottom line is, when it was time to engage in battle (election theft), John Kerry ran home leaving the troops standing on the battlefield with no leader.

[blm]

13. Except it wasn't 20 years ago, was it? Kerry worked for over 30 years and

took on really tough jobs the entire time.

I think Dems fall into the trap the media set by palming off everything Kerry did as long ago.

His IranContra work was started 20 years ago. That lasted just over a year till the senate gave in to an investigation.

Then he went to work uncovering BCCI which took him 5 years and only stopped because Clinton wanted it dropped and closed.

Then he took on normalizing relations with Vietnam, allowing gays to serve in the military, and writing a book about the funding of global terrorism by international financiers and institutions.

When you go along with the GOP media spin and diminsh these efforts and especially BCCI, you are helping to bury the story as inconsequential when in reality, everything that is happening today from 9-11 to Iraq policy has its roots in the BCCI story.

If BCCI was not closed as a case by Clinton, would the BFEE by wielding power today? Shouldn't that matter?

[Boredtodeath]

15. The blm "Kerry sermon"

Didn't work during the election - won't work now.

Of course, it was nice of you to prove my point. :evilgrin:

[CatWoman]

17. so it's HER fault people are fucking jerks?

[blm]

18. The truth never changes and the truth never bores me.

If more people tuned into the truth about Kerry's crucial work and the truth about BushInc, wouldn't it make a difference?

[LittleClarkie]

31. blm is one of the most level headed, factual and knowledgeable

people in his support of Kerry that I've seen here. Hardly ever even raises his voice. Just keeps busy putting the truth out there.

If you want to call that a sermon, so be it.

But when truth "doesn't work" then we have problems.

[Larkspur]

3. The only thing I'd agree with you is it's not right for bartcop to praise

Clinton uncritically. Other than that we will continue to disagree about Kerry.

[lojasmo]

6. I agree....in fact....

Bart, in one piece criticized EVERY DEMOCRAT WHO VOTED FOR THE WAR...but exempted Clinton. He actually published my letter criticizing him for that.

BUT....Kerry is one of the worst bush-kneepad wearing senators around. His votes on the most critical pieces of legislation over the last three years have been attrocious.

[LittleClarkie]

4. I hadn't heard that about Clinton's influence at the convention

Are you supposing it, or were there reports at the time that suggested he was the architect of the tone of the convention?

I do know that when they tried to trot out "it's the economy, stupid" again, it was not ultimately correct. No, it was 9/11 and Iraq, stupid. What was supposed to be Kerry's weakest debate turned out to be his strongest. Whenever he outlined things like his plan for Iraq, it showed people he could be trusted with our nation security. THAT is where he started to gain ground at the end.

Bubba might have meant well, but if he and Carville and the other Clintonistas were the ones who were telling him to go to the economy rather than foreign policy, I'm not sure they were right, not at all.

But then, who was it who were yelling for Kerry to attack more?

Well, actually, he had most of the party treating him as a pushmepullyou. The economy, the war, the environment, back to the economy, the party itself couldn't agree on what he should be doing, just on the fact that they thought it was wrong. That was why people were barred from bringing their negativity to Kerry in the last months. His outlook got better, and he started gaining momentum.

I don't know if I would hang it mostly on Clinton, except to say that I think the only one he knows how to elect is himself. His advice was in a 90s time warp as well I think.

[blm]

7. I'm bringing Clinton in as the measure that bartcop uses. I'm not nearly

as articulate as bartcop and would never even pretend to be, but, since he attacks Kerry so relentlessly with his PERCEIVED grievances and heaps constant praise on every move the Clintons make, which tend to be further right than Kerry's positions, I just got agitated by the obvious disconnect...thus, the rambling rant.

[UTUSN]

9. Excuse the Rant? You're GREAT When You Rant n/t

[CatWoman]

14. a ha!!!!

caught ya flirting!!!!!!!!

:hi:

[blm]

20. Can't I have ANY guy to myself? Sheesh....

you take all my guys and nsma takes all my women.

[CatWoman]

23. bwahahahahahaha

actually, I'll hand wrestle you for him :D

:hi:

[sshan2525]

10. Ah, Bill Clinton

Best Republican President of the 21st century.

[5thGenDemocrat]

11. My main current beef with Bartcop

Is his putting Carl Levin in a pink tutu. Levin voted AGAINST the IWR and has been a vocal critic of this regime throughout. The other assclowns so portrayed ALL voted for the resolution and Carl doesn't deserve the cheap smear of being pictured with them.
Hell, I like Bartcop most of the time. I've bookmarked the site and have even sent comments in. But I hope Bart gets to figuring out who his real friends are pretty damned soon.
John
And, if Hillary gets the nomination in 2008, I'll vote Socialist Worker Party, I swear to Zeus. That from a fifth generation Democrat.

[Cha]

16. bart always had

Kerry in a pink tutu but by his rational..the clintons should be the head ballet dancers.

Edit~And who was it who said that clinton was the best republican president we ever had?

[CatWoman]

19. I think Michael Moore said that

[Cha]

22. Oh yeah, thanks..

I just read it again on DU the couple of days :silly:

[ibegurpard]

24. I think you are way too invested in Kerry

but I agree that people need to take off the Clinton blinders they put on during the whole impeachment mess. I hated having to defend him because he disappointed me SO much (and that's from a policy standpoint...I could give a rat's ass who was blowing him). Senator Clinton leaves me similarly cold.

[blm]

27. I do feel invested in Kerry, because of his work in BCCI. I wish more

people were, because we wouldn't be living under this regime right now and with planes being flown into buildings if BCCI had been given priority attention by the media, and by us.

I failed to speak out and support Kerry as he was going through those tough years. Imagine Conyers with NO INTERNET warriors helping him. Who could tough that out for 5 years?

It was that inaction by people like me staying on the sidelines which allowed the BFEE to become more powerful. Now that I know what Kerry knows and what he endured because of it, yes...I am invested in him and every lawmaker who takes on the absolute corruption of these powermongers.

[LittleClarkie]

29. Part of what makes me blow my stack re: Kerry detractors

is that a goodly number of the talking points against Kerry are the same ones that came out of the Nixon White House, and indeed his time as the whistleblower for BCCI and Iran/Contra. He was politically damaged during those times, and it seems like many of those talking points have stuck.

It's the kneejerk reaction of folks like Bartcop or Kos, reacting to Kerry in a way almost divorced from the facts, as if they were responding to "conventional wisdom" when we KNOW how far off that can be, as if it were the "in" thing to blame or deride in an almost intellectually lazy way, that gets my goat as well.

I have shown that when Clark or Dean or Durbin or anyone is attacked in that same dishonest, distorted way, I will be there. Criticism is one thing, but distortions WILL be rebutted.

[blm]

30. Personally, I think everyone should be invested in any lawmaker who sets

a course to expose corruption.

Had more invested in Kerry during BCCI, there would BE no 9-11 tragedy.

[sendero]

25. Well he's half right....

... he's right about Kerry and wrong about Clinton.

[AlGore-08.com]

26. Bartcop has been putting Clinton on a pedistal for years

He spent most of the 2000 election complaining about Gore not being Clinton, so it's not surprising that he complains that Kerry is not Clinton, either.

[warrens]

28. Nice rant, BLM

I'm with Bart nearly all the time, but not on this one.

[yankeedem]

32. Kerry is a better liberal, but

A Clinton wouldn't have gone on vacation when the Smear Boat Veterans attacked. That is most of Bart's problem with Kerry, IMO.

Do you remember the 92 campaign? They threw an affair, draft dodging, and everything else at him, and he came out swinging.

Do you remember Hillary's Senate campaign? Lazio spend as much or more money trying to smear Hillary, and had the backing of the press and all the smear machine- she came out swinging.

John Kerry lost the election because of the Swift Boat Liars- he let them run those ads for weeks in Ohio without attacking. Blame him, blame Mary Beth Cahill, that is where the election was lost.

[KharmaTrain]

33. It's More There's Really No One To Look To...

Bart, like many of us, is frustrated with Democrats rolling over. He was critical of Kerry for years (that pink tutu graphic with Kerry on it goes way before IWR) and the party in general for letting the Repugnicans set the political tone and agenda.

The thing that got Bart rolling (and many of us online), was the Clinton Inquisition. I was a regular Bartcop reader then and still am now. At the time, a lot of us weren't that crazy about Clinton (he was waaay too cozy with the big business interests), but compared to the assholes attacking him, the man became almost a saint. Clinton fought...and for much of it, stood alone. Bart recognized that and I think that has a lot to do with why he's so glowing on his look back at the Clinton years.

There are a lot of us who are frustrated at the major Democrats being constantly beaten into appologizing or "restating positions" or just falling into Rovian traps that are used to make the party look weak. We're tired of having to soft-peddle around the right wing jakals who don't hesitate to call us losers and traitors at the slightest provocation.

As one who grew up idolizing Robert Kennedy and a generation of Democrats like Paul Simon, Hubert Humphrey and others, I look around today and don't see that calibre of leadership. Be it being jaded. Be it being naive. Be it being perception. But the conviction in today's Democratic leadership vs. that of what I grew up with seems to be out of whack and Democrats just can't figure their way out of this rut.

Kerry was a weak candidate...albeit better than ANY Repugnican, but his poorly run campaign is still stinging and frustrating to many of us. It's not about stolen balots, this election shouldn't have been close...states that didn't have BBV that could have been won, weren't. Time to move along...2006 now looms and we face a very difficult election just to hold on to what we currently have. It's time to start hitting back and aiming those shots at the cause of our troubles...the Repugnicans and not at ourselves.

Peace...