I hung out with John Kerry today

[WilliamPitt]

After weeks and weeks of pestering his people for an interview (and, concurrently, after a favorable shakeup in the communications staff), I finally managed to get Senator Kerry alone (sorta) for a while today for an interview. The transcript of the whole thing will be available Sunday night/Monday morning, after I finish transcribing it, so I'm not here to talk about what he said. For the record, these were the questions:

===

1. Senator Bill Nelson revealed on Monday that he and some 75 other Senators had been given an intelligence briefing by a Bush administration official just before the Iraq war vote, during the time frame of those quotes I just read. In that briefing, they were told that Iraq had not only chemical and biological weapons, but had the technical capability to strike American cities on the East Coast with unmanned drones filled with these poisons. Nelson refused to divulge who gave the briefing. I want to take you back to this time, to September and early October of 2002. What were you thinking about during this period, in the days and weeks before the Iraq resolution? I know you can’t reveal classified briefings, but what were you getting at the time data that persuaded you that a yes vote was the proper course?

2. I wrote a book last September stating that Iraq’s WMD capabilities had been grossly exaggerated by the administration, and therefore their rationale for war had no standing. That book, over the last fifteen months, has been proven to have been absolutely correct on this point. A lot of people read that book, and have subsequently turned away from your campaign for one reason: These people believe this data was out there before the Iraq vote, that it was available to you, and they believe you chose to ignore it or disregard it and vote in favor of the war. How would you answer that charge?

3. True or False: A solution to the Iraq problem, particularly the need to bring international cooperation into the conflict, and into the repair of that country, will never be found as long as Bush is in the White House.

4. Do you feel a kinship with the peace movement that exploded around this Iraq invasion, given your background? Or do you feel alienated from them because of that vote?

5. One last question, off the Iraq topic. In terms of the 2004 campaign, the central argument put up by a lot of people in the Democratic base who are against you is that you don’t “get it.” They see other candidates as fighters for their progressive values, and they see you saying “Get over it” after the election debacle in Florida, as quoted by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. And yet your voting record in the Senate is clearly as progressive as the day is long. Where do you stand with the progressive community? Do you "get it"? Can you be their leader?

===

I had several others, including a Beers question, but we ran out of time. We'll cover all that on Monday.

I'm writing to give a personal impression of the guy. I'd met him before at that thing in New York, but it was a crowded room and he had his game face on. Today was me, him and three campaign guys stuffed into a minivan while blasting down some New Hampshire back road to a gig at a high school.

I did the interview in the car. He was up front in the passenger seat and I was in the back behind the drivers seat. He twisted himself all the way around so we could talk face to face, and the conversation was open and frank and just good.

My point, basically, is that reports of Kerry being 'stiff' are greatly exaggerated. The dude was just chill, really nice. I've been a supporter of his for a while, based on a number of basic political calculations and because of his record. I can say now that I also support him because's a good guy to be stuck in a car with.

After the interview, I watched him do his thing with a bunch of high school kids at Hopkinton High. He lit them up, really had them into the conversation. I used to teach kids that age, and I thought he drew them out probably better than a lot of their teachers could. Coverage of that gig is here:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2003_1218a.html

By the way, he said at that gig the magic words as far as I am concerned, words I've been using myself for a few years now: “We need a new Manhattan Project to make America energy independent of Middle East oil in 10 years by creating alternative fuels like ethanol and wind power and by making our cars more efficient.”

This interview with Kerry is the second one of these I've done. Dean was the first:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/052203A.shtml

I'm going to go after Clark and Kucinich next. Stay tuned. :)

[sistersofmercy]

1. Can't wait to read it sounds like choice reading

Lucky you!:kick:

[sandnsea]

2. Lucky you!!!

Again, I'm thrilled for you Will! Can't wait for the details, uhm... I think!!

[curse10]

3. Awesome!

I'm glad we are getting some first hand accounts here at DU :-)

[mzmolly]

4. No tough questions?

Like, why did you refer to the international community as Simon? And, do you think doing so lends itself to 'international cooperation'. ;)

[WilliamPitt]

6. I'm sure that's funny

But I don't get it. :) Help?

[mzmolly]

9. OMG... Search for "Simon " here on DU... okey dokey...

You must be a busy guy... :P

[Salviati]

5. Any candidate that said this:

“We need a new Manhattan Project to make America energy independent of Middle East oil in 10 years by creating alternative fuels like ethanol and wind power and by making our cars more efficient.”

Has got my enthusiastic vote in the general election. I haven't made up my mind about the primaries yet (if we're even going to have one here), but that's more of a "there are so many good choices" problem...

[LSK]

20. Deans been saying the same thing

Not exactly using the phrase "Manhattan Project", but he talks about using wind power and ethanol also. Kerry has no monopoly on this issue.

[Zomby Woof]

38. don't recall reading Pitt saying he did

No one claims anyone has a monopoly on the alternative energy issue.

Though there may be some truth to the rumor that Dean invented the windmills his supporters attempt to tilt.

[Salviati]

39. Well I'll be glad to vote for him too if I get the chance...

Like I said: Too many good choices!

[GalleryGod]

105. Yeah,Sure!

:silly:

[KoKo]

7. glad you had a good day with him in the back of the car..and he was

impressive to you. Although, I would think a ride in the car with any of our Dem Candidates would be impressive. They are all good...even "Holy Joe" to ride in the car with.

I look forward to your "meat on the bones" interview. I'm sure it will be interesting with the "teasers" you've put out here. You know how we feel here, and Skinner's poll shows Kerry's in "dire shape" on DU. He's gotta "turn it around" by doing something drastic against Bush and not something "drastic" agains the other Dem Candidates.

thanks. :-)'s to you.

[MuseRider]

8. Good questions, Will.

All good and ones I would like a real answer to. I am excited for you and excited to read your interview. THANKS!

[oasis]

10. Thanks in advance.

[JI7]

11. sounds good

i would like to hang out with john kerry too. but not for any interview or anything.

[GalleryGod]

106. Besides to borrow a phrase from my Dad's Generation: He's A MAN's MAN.

Kerry enjoys skiing-just not on HIS COUNTRY'S TIME!

[thinkahead]

12. I look forward to the read

but, should I expect impartiality too?

[WilliamPitt]

13. Not sure what you mean

The interview will be the candidate's own words, so impartiality is implicit in the fact that I will be acting as a stenographer. You want impartiality at truthout, you got it. You want it here? Why should I be the only one?

[thinkahead]

50. you know exactly what I mean

We complain day after day around these parts about the "lapdog" press. You are clearly a Kerry partisan, and I while I respect your right to interview your candidate (and laud your ability to do so), based on your attacks on other candidates, I do not expect you to frame your story in the most balanced fashion possible.

I would love to be proven wrong, but thats the cynic in me speaking up, as it unfortunately has to, these days.

The analogy that comes to mind is a Fox News interview with George W. Bush. Please prove me wrong.

Thanks in advance.

[WilliamPitt]

53. Rather than try to prove you wrong

I'll advise you to read someone else's work. I don't have to prove squat to you, friend. I've put my work in, and will match my credibility with pretty much anyone else you can think of. I like John Kerry, so fucking sue me. Read someone else.

[dave29]

64. Well, you don't have to get all snippy about it

;)

[Scott Lee]

96. Goodness Will....why such a grumpy goose?

I think the question was legitimate, and please don't blame others because *Kerry is going to likely be the first to drop out of the race. Politics is a tough game.

[Crewleader]

14. Wonderful William

I look forward to your interview with Kerry...and the one with Clark and Kucinich...they all are getting to know YOU.
And I wouldn't be surprise if all three would ask for your services in the future. :-)

[OneBlueSky]

15. I support Kerry, and love his Manhattan Project idea, but . . .

let's give credit where credit is due . . . Gephart was talking about a Manhattan Project for energy independence over a year ago . . . I'm glad that Kerry has adopted the idea, but lets give props to Gep for coming up with it first . . .

[WilliamPitt]

16. Fair enough

I actually didn't know that. Thought I was being clever. :)

[ModerateMiddle]

36. Gep calls it an "Apollo Project"

I like Manhatten better.

[babzilla]

42. The Apollo Project was going to the moon

The Manhattan Project was building the atomic bomb.

I like the Apollo Project better.

[JI7]

22. didn't gep oppose cafe standards ?

didn't gephardt oppose the bill which would have raised cafe standards ? i could be wrong about this, but that's what i remember. if gep did use the term manhattan project, he does deserves credit for it. but i like kerry because he has a huge record to back it up also, plus a very well detailed plan on how to do it.

[sandnsea]

24. August 2002

I have no idea who did what first, but with Kerry's involvement in the environment and energy going back years, I would think he was as much a "first" as anyone. Here's something from August 2002:

"First and foremost, we must lead at home, where Americans' unrivaled ability to drive economic growth through innovation can protect the environment and create jobs. Why not set a national goal of having 20% of our electricity come from domestic alternative and renewable sources, including wind and solar power, by the year 2020? Isn't that a vision worthy of America? Developing new energy technologies can create thousands of good new jobs. Renewable energy can be generated, transported and consumed in America. And we can export our technology. I don't think we should take a backseat to the Germans or the Japanese in creating clean energies no American soldier will ever have risk life and limb to protect."

http://www.time.com/time/2002/greencentury/enkerry.html

[sandnsea]

27. Gephardt's Manhattan Project

Looks like that was a plan for the middle class economy back in 1995.

http://civic.net/civic-values.archive/199511/msg00109.html

[Spider Jerusalem]

28. Yeah, and Kerry was talking about it over a year ago, too.

Gephardt didn't come up with uit first, sorry. Sometimes people have the same idea independently...strange but true.

[blm]

65. No can do, OneBlueSky. Kerry was talking about it like the space program

for at least two years now. In fact, when I heard Gephardt first mention it earlier this year, I couldn't believe how close it sounded like Kerry's wording. Kerry said the research for energy alternatives should get the same dedication we employed to go to the moon. The only newer part is calling it a "Manhattan project" endeavor.

[La_Serpiente]

17. I'll be looking forward to it

:-)

[windansea]

18. great quote!

"We need a new Manhattan Project to make America energy independent of Middle East oil in 10 years by creating alternative fuels"

JFK like.....

but the 2nd part is kind of lame

ethanol is a midwest pork rind boondoggle...E=MC2d not working here and windpower is not applicable on a macro economic scale...there are more promising technologies

[never cry wolf]

19. Thanks for the heads up

Congrats, and I'll be looking forward to the full interview.

[littlejoe]

21. I am sincerely impressed. This is the type of report that

I appreciate.

[BurtWorm]

23. Excellent questions, Will!

Thank you for asking them. Can't wait to see how he answered.

[Patriot_Spear]

25. Kerry is getting a bum rap- too bad this isn't a mainstream piece...

I think it could really do Kerry some good! Great article!

[molly]

26. That's why I support him - I met him!

at a Biden Seminar here a handful of years back. He was warm, intelligent, energetic, humorous, very smart, well educated and truly magnetic!

[Patriot_Spear]

29. My Dad never liked Kerry... something about Viet Nam.

Dad was a Marine, didn't like any anti-war folks. We didn't always agree.

[molly]

30. Kerry talked a lot about his experiences in Viet Nam

at that seminar. I remember feeling impressed by his courage and honor - and then with his fight to end it all.

[Patriot_Spear]

31. So what was that flap with the Clark people and Chicken wings for Kerry?

Do you know the scoop? Just goofing around?

[molly]

32. I have no idea what you are referring to?

(good English - sorry)

[Patriot_Spear]

33. Oh, the Clark Camp sent the Kerry Camp a bunch of left wings...

Chicken wings. I figured you'd know more as a Kerry supporter.

[molly]

35. I've been working a lot and miss some things

sorry I missed that - it must have been funny. As a matter of fact - I am SO tired, I'm about to fall asleep typing. I do what I can to support Kerry.

[robbedvoter]

111. Friendly ribbing between 2 campaigns where there's mutual respect

You wouldn't understand the concept.

[Byronic]

44. John McCain thought the same as your dad

initially. McCain kept a distance from Kerry in the senate for several years and he freely admits that Kerry's leading role in Vietnam Veterans Against The War was something that he was not comfortable with.

That all changed, however, when McCain found himself sitting with Kerry on a long plane flight. Speaking to the man face-to-face and getting to know him, changed everything. They worked together on the volatile Vietnam POW/MIAs issue and on the normalization of relations with Vietnam. They are now very good friends.

It was said of Al Gore back in 2000, and I think the same could be said of John Kerry right now: If he could speak to every voter in America one-on-one he would probably win in a landslide.

[adadem]

47. like Larry King Live or baba wawa n/t

[NewYorkerfromMass]

59. Kerry is much better than Gore in most every aspect

charisma, intelligence, knowledge....but it his depth of reach into every issue on the table which is so impressive. And it is even better than Gore's.

[Patriot_Spear]

68. Thanks for your post...

That's good to know.

[RandomUser]

34. Awesome, Will

I'm looking forward to hearing more of your report. Keep up the good work!

:yourock:

[JustJoe]

37. Great Dean interview...

PITT: Are you going to be willing to take political risks in going after the administration and leveling criticisms?

DEAN: Don't you think I already have? (laughter) Look, the only way we're going to beat George Bush is to stand up to him. Inside the Beltway, you get trained differently. None of the people I am running against are bad people. Believe me, if one of them gets the nomination, I'm going to vote for them. But inside the Beltway you get trained to minimize the risk, maximize your appeal to every interest group at the same time, and consequently you vote on both sides of every issue....

That's the kind of positioning the American people just don't understand. They think, what is this? Why are you voting every which way? We're not going to win elections like that. People in my party fundamentally misunderstand why this President is popular. The reason he is popular has absolutely nothing to do with the issues. It has to do with the fact that people think he is a leader. The way to deal with a leader is to be another leader, and to be strong in your views and present the American people with a choice. Not to take half of his policies and vote for them, and then say, "Well, I voted for half of the policies, but I thought he was a little wrong on this one." That's not going to win us this election.

[Paragon]

40. I said he doesn't "get it" after he made this statement:

"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."

Kinda flies in the face of what you said here:

For all the pomp and circumstance that has surrounded the extraction of the former Iraqi dictator from a hole in the ground, the reality is that the United States is not one bit safer now that the man is in chains...Hussein was never a threat to the United States. His capture means nothing to the safety and security of the American people.

According to John Kerry, you & I (and a hell of a lot of other people) are also among "those who believe we are not safer with his capture". Howard Dean agrees - "The capture of Saddam has not made America safer." (his exact quote on the subject)

I realize Dean had the luxury of sitting out the IWR vote, and was also not exposed to whatever bullshit "faith-based intelligence" meeting Kerry was. (Is this why Dennis Kucinich wasn't "misled" by the Bush Administration on Iraq? He wasn't invited to this meeting?)

Now while one (big, fat) issue does not a candidate make, I don't see how either of us can accept Kerry's statement as anything else than a deliberately misleading grab at post-capture primary votes. That lie (yes, I said it) makes me question his "judgment" and "credibility". That's what I wished you'd specifically asked him about - but I'm willing to listen to you or Kerry refute this, if possible.

[windansea]

45. good points

The major mistakes Kerry has made in this campaign are his flip flops on Iraq...he can blame his yes vote on bad intel and then criticize bush admin for poor planning and exit strategy...but jumping back in when successes like Saddam capture happen are confusing...where does he really stand?

Dean's success with anti war strategy drew Kerry et all to the left

What happens if Iraq stabalizes and is perceived as a victory?

[Cheswick2.0]

48. truth matters more than perceptions

People will understand the truth if you tell it to them. This is why Dean is successful, people are tired of politicians like Kerry who pander to perceptions.

[windansea]

41. re question #2

hindsight is 20/20

what so many seem to forget is that at the time the vote to go to war in Iraq...Bush had 80% approval rating...americans were traumatized by 9/11, fully paranoid of terrorism, and SCREAMING TO STRIKE BACK...Iraq's documented history in pursuing WMDs fed by intel reports that AT THE TIME WERE BELIEVED BY ALMOST EVERYBODY (including Dean & Clark) resulted in an overwhelming and bi-partisan vote to go to war...given these conditions it was political suicide to oppose the war...it's easy to criticize those votes now...if Dean and Clark were in the Senate at this time I am 100% certain they would have voted yes as well...based on their statements during that time...DK is the ONLY CANDIDATE who had the balls to vote no and the only candidate (IMHO) with true anti Iraq war credentials.

I understand and do not find fault with Kerry and the rest who were faced with a tough decision THEY HAD TO VOTE YES OR NO ON...Dean and Clark can pose as anti IWR but I perceive their positions as duplicitous...taken for political reasons and not from true convictions.

For these reasons I suspect the integrity of both Clark and Dean...I'd rather back a man who made an honest mistake than those who play politics and assume "positions" after the fact, and not in a position where they are forced to go on record.

[Cheswick2.0]

51. It was WRONG to strike back at Iraq for 9-11

Bush's approval ratings should not have mattered when democrats voted in the congress and senate, but they did as you have just stated. Kerry voted based on those approval ratings. Attacking Iraq was wrong even with WMD. Unless there was reason (I mean beyond the lies told by the BFEE and believed by no one with a brain not owned by the right)to believe that Iraq was about to attack us. The average american might have an excuse to have believed the bush propaganda, but Kerry should have known better. I am sure he did know better. He blinked, he flinched and now he is paying the price.

Thousands/millions of americans were begging him and other democrats to stop bush and he failed the test. Yes it is a fact that neither Dean nor Clark had to put their vote on the line. That can hardly be held against them. However Dean is saying now what he said then, that unilateral invasion of Iraq was the wrong thing to do and that Iraq was not our biggest or most important threat.

It is sad, he has been around for a long time and he has paid his dues, however sometimes that just isn't enough in politics.

[helleborient]

54. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 - sad that Kerry thought it did...

At least that seems to be what you're saying...

By the way...why at least two different DU ID's...I'm just curious..what happened to sandnsea?

[windansea]

93. this is my only DU id

sandnsea is not me!!

[Scott Lee]

101. Kerry and Cheney agree on this one.

It's a conspiracy theory that won't die - like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or the Bilderburg control of all 7-11s.

Come to me, Bigfoot. Come to me, Overlords of the UFOOOOO....

[Clark Can WIN]

43. How was his breath?

Was it minty fresh?

Seriously, I like K-man. He's my @2 tied with Edwards.

:toast:

[phillybri]

46. You're the man, Will!

:kick:

[flpoljunkie]

49. Thanks, Will. Kerry does indeed light up audiences: press ignores this.

The lazy, feckless press prefers to label Kerry as "aloof". Well, screw the "liberal" media. We are honored to hear from people like you, Will, who speak truth to power.

I look forward to the complete interview.

[helleborient]

52. So how do you even put on a pretense of journalistic neutrality...?

Why should someone read your interviews with any kind of expectation that they are fair to anyone but Kerry?

It seems that if we care about journalistic fairness, we should certainly be as wary of fairness given to the other Democratic candidates as fairness given by right-leaning journalism to any Democrat.

[WilliamPitt]

55. You're so right. So very right. So totally right

or not:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/052203A.shtml

I will assume you missed this the first time you didn't read my post. Maybe if you don't read it again, you won't not miss the link I just gave you.

[helleborient]

56. Yep, gotcha questions for Dean...puff for Kerry...

Leading him into answers to put himself in the best possible light. I can't wait for his enlightened answers (sarcasm)

But asking Howard Dean why he didn't make personal appearances at the anti-war rallies.

Thanks for agreeing there is no neutrality here...reminds me of the tough vs. puff interviewing on Faux News for Dems vs. Repubs

[WilliamPitt]

57. If you think that interview with Dean

is not the mother of all puff interviews, then I have no respect for your analytical abilities. On the other hand, I threw Kerry's vote in his face on two separate occasions, one from the perspective of the author of the book that proved his vote wrong before he ever voted for it.

Go ahead, though. It sounds nice in your universe. Monochromatic and everything.

[helleborient]

60. Nope...just asking for journalistic integrity...

In my book, integrity doesn't come from openly campaigning for one candidate, then pretending to be even-handed on others.

C'mon, use the integrity to go public in the press to endorse Kerry, like Molly Ivins endorsing Dean, and go from there...make sure it's known when you ask Kerry questions that you already reported on his answers (after the Franken cocktail party) previously...that you know what his answer will be and know how to ask it in a way to put him in the best possible light.

I saw Howard Dean in person as well...up close and personal...but I'm not pretending to be an evenhanded journalist when I say I think he's great.

I'm not happy with the press in general...integrity and real investigative journalism seems lost...

[WilliamPitt]

62. I don't hide my Kerry affinity here

I wonder if you're having the same issues with Joan Walsh. Find me a truthout story - one - where I say anything bad about Howard Dean or any of the other candidates. I can make it easy for you: You won't find one.

[helleborient]

66. Nope, but the difference is tone...

And, yes, you do hide the affinity in the public press...why not post it on truthout?..that is what I'm talking about.

Molly Ivins doesn't hide it...and I'm not on a board with Joan Walsh where she is campaigning for Dean...do you have evidence she is?

And what exactly was wrong in Walsh's reporting about Kerry's lies? Did she misquote him?

[WilliamPitt]

67. truthout is a non-profit

which means, by law, that we cannot advocate for one specific candidate. Walsh's piece does not in any way display the objectivity you seem to crave. I think you're looking for one particular perspective that agrees with the name on your avatar, and if you don't get what you want, you make these noises. No credibility.

[helleborient]

69. And your credibility in discussing Dean?

So...why don't you have a Kerry avatar here? Hiding something? Yep...it does sound like you're having some difficulty dealing with real criticism instead of fawning.

Your credibility is about the same for discussing Dean as mine in discussing Kerry, in my book.

You seem incapable of refuting Walsh...or identifying where she is actively campaigning for Dean.

Your campaigning is clear, as you've said...and you are running a political non-profit which claims to be neutral, when you yourself are not neutral.

This is another problem in politics in the U.S....political non-profits on both the left and right that hide behind laws intended to help non-profits to do educational non-partisan work.

I'm sorry, the puff piece published on truthout about the cocktail paty with John Kerry is hardly non-partisan...and really not deserving of non-profit status...no more deserving of that status than similar groups on the right.

[Patriot_Spear]

73. I'd drop it; Pitt is a columnist, not a journalist- big difference...

I think the difference is clear- his bias is not only clear but unapologetic, as it should be; like all wtachdogs in the media- he doesn't pretend to be balanced. Just be glad he's a Dem.

Maybe he'll be more fair to Dean if Kerry decides to drop out. His articles are good.

[helleborient]

74. Yep a columnist skirting non-profit laws by hiding his pro-Kerry bias...

Sheesh.

[Patriot_Spear]

75. C'mon give him a break...

Kerry is his candidate, what would you have him do?

[WilliamPitt]

76. He'd have me either advocate for Dean or say nothing at all.

Your self-righteous indignation, after posting Walsh yet again in an inflammatory anti-Kerry way that earned a padlock (again) is duly noted. You have yet to be able to find one instance of bias in any of my truthout work. The recent Kerry piece, held up to my Dean interview and the writing I did about Kucinich, deflates you, and you know it, but keep trying.

[GobGoober]

77. My opinion, I'd rather see journalists stay out of it altogether

Yes, Journalists are people. Yes, they have opinions. The moment a journalist expresses a personal opinion, they can no longer be objective or at least give the appearance of objectivity.

So, Mr. Pitt, it is my humble opinion that I can no longer rely on anything you publish on the primaries because you have admitted and openly supported one of the nine candidates. I will check out what you write after the primaries, but you can no longer be a source for me in the primaries, just like Molly Ivins.

In these primaries, I'm looking for objectivity because how things are conducted now will have bearing on how, or even if, I will vote come Novemeber 2, 2004. At this point, Kerry may or may not get my vote if he is nominated. Dean probably wouldn't. Clark probably would. I need objectivity in the information I am sorting through now. It is my opinion that I cannot rely upon your work for that level of objectivity.

[Patriot_Spear]

79. Objectivity is a tough thing to find these days...

That would make a good thread- 'who are the objective journalists?'

[GobGoober]

80. I really don't think there are any

I guess what I'm really saying is, I don't think there are any real journalists left in the world.

Sad, but probably true.

:(

[WilliamPitt]

81. Well, you're in luck, I guess

because, aside from the Kerry interview we will be running on Monday, my focus will remain where it always has been: On Bush, Iraq, the war on terror and the rest of it. I'll send you everything you'll miss once this is over.

I also reserve the right to call bullshit on you if you a) post any articles by any journalist pertaining to the primaries, or b) voice your approval in any thread about a journalist speaking of these primaries.

[Patriot_Spear]

82. Wow, that seems pretty harsh... why make this personal?

I may not agree with it, but he has a point of view. Surely we can just agree to disagree?

[WilliamPitt]

88. Fine by me

I've spent half this thread defending myself from accusations that I am some kind of press whore, Kerry whore or Fox News clone...but why get personal about it? You're right.

[GobGoober]

90. Fair enough, but please take my comments the way they were given

I take most of what the so-called journalists out there have to say with a grain of salt. I've completely dismissed Fineman and Ivins. None of the people on television are objective.

Eh, I have to see what some are saying compare it to what others are saying and come to some soirt of a conclusion somewhere in between them.

It gets frustrating, which is why I sat the minor elections in 2002 out.

[helleborient]

84. No attempt to defend Kerry's lies...

Just attempts to use personal attacks against DU policy...just like me.

[GobGoober]

86. No need to get personal about it

a) I don't post articles here, I am here trying to get the lowdown on people who could possibly get my vote next November. I voted for Harry Browne in 2000, which is a sad commentary on the field of candidates in 2000. Bush might have gotten my vote, but he's such a spoiled rich kid I just didn't trust him.

b) I'd first have to see a real journalist. I think they went extinct back in the seventies.

I have no horse in this race because I won't be voting in any primary. I'm an independent. I'm keeping an eye on the field to see if anybody better than Bush is nominated by the Democrats. It's possible I'll be voting for the Democrat next November. I might vote Libertarian again, I'm not sure right now. I could just get disgusted with the whole thing and stay home like I did in 2002. We'll just have to see.

So far, I'm not too impressed with anybody, especially Bush.

[GalleryGod]

107. At what Station Stop are these NEWBIE'S Getting On Board?

Find it:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Patriot_Spear]

78. It's a shame we just can't support all our candidates...

But it's important that their message get's out- especially through the interview process, like with your truthout articles.

I think Dean and Kerry are both great leaders who deserve praise.

[helleborient]

85. If non-partisan, why reprint Alterman's personal plug for Kerry...

"Alterman, for one, was sold. In his MSNBC blog report on the meeting, he wrote, “It was all on the record and yet, it was remarkably open, honest and unscripted. Let’s be blunt. Kerry was terrific. Once again, he demonstrated a thoughtfulness, knowledge base and value system that gives him everything, in my not-so-humble-opinion, he could need to be not just a good, but a great president.”

There was no refutation of this...and the article was supposedly about what happened at the event, not what Eric Alterman is writing on his BLOG...wasn't it?

[helleborient]

87. I look for honesty in the press..and if you're a Kerry advocate...

Be honest about it...and honestly own up to the fact that when readers find out about the background of the person writing, it is important in understanding and analyzing what is written. When Molly Ivins says she's a Dean supporter, every thing she writes should be seen through that prism. This is why any English class sees the background of an author as important. Truthout does not give clear indication of your background as a partisan supporter of Kerry - in my mind, important information that is left out.

I did find bias...particularly in the lush writing of Alterman from his BLOG that seems quoted in the piece on Kerry for NO other reason than to point out another journalist is fawning on Kerry.

I don't claim Walsh is unbiased, and she's not claiming non-biased non-profit status either...but I also don't claim she's lying, are you? If so, please point out what is wrong in her reporting.

I really don't care who you support...just be open about it IN PUBLIC...instead of following what I hate when Repubs do it...skirting non-profit law for partisan political activity

[RetroLounge]

70. I don't personally know Will Pitt

except thru his posts here on DU and writing on Truthout, oh, and one time I saw him on CSPAN, but I think it's well known he supports Kerry, but it's also well known that he's ABB like most of us.

I think it would be a death knell for Will's reputation both on DU and as a journalist to do what you are suggesting. And such tactics would put in the same category as the Media Whores we rail against. After seeing the risk he took in quitting his teaching job and going all out against the right, I doubt he would do something so obvious and f*ck it all up.

So I will put my trust on the side of Will being fair and if nothing else, probably being harder on his candidate than the others.

Look forward to reading all the interviews...

[WilliamPitt]

71. Thanks, RL

That was really appreciated.

[helleborient]

72. So...it's ok to do these things on the left but not the right...

Yep, this sort of thing...truthout as a non-partisan non-profit???? Where are the pro-Republican articles?

Another political site benefiting from the tax breaks that are supposed to go to truly non-partisan organizations.

Sours me on all of it...and makes it all look no better than a playground fight.

One of the reasons I support Dean...searching for ways to change the rules and get us back toward a real democracy. That's why I'm writing letters with other everyday people in my community...and fed up with all of the talking head journalism.

That someone searching to uncover the corruption in our government accepts an invitation by a candidate for a private party then writes about how wonderful the candidate is. Doesn't that sound like the writer is whoring for the candidate? It would if someone accepted a similar invitation from Bush and then wrote about how wonderful in person Bush is....

[windansea]

95. you talk about honesty

and support Dean???

what is a "truly non partisan organization"

can you name a few??

[blm]

98. Well, that good old Frank Luntz claims Dean has won every debate

so, I guess that would be a truly non partisan evaluation from an honest news source.

[ibegurpard]

109. Let's also not forget the absolutely brutal beating

he took here when he interviewed Dean months ago. He was accused of bias from all corners because he interviewed Dean first and didn't send out requests for interviews to all the candidates at the same time or some ridiculous thing like that. It was pathetic. I must say I preferred the Will that was pretending to be unbiased but when it comes to his interviews with candidates, I trust him not to let his bias get in the way.

[MaineDem]

58. You've made it worthwhile visiting GD again!

Thanks, Will. I, too, look forward to reading the full interview.

I've always found JK to be fantastic in person. Theresa as well.

[Hep]

61. The dude is just chill

How's his shizzle?

[WilliamPitt]

63. Nizzle

:)

[a_random_joel]

83. Thanks for asking about the "get over it" statement.

I hope for Kerry's sake he can turn it around, but for me, that was the thing that did Kerry in. He was not wise or savvy enough to recover from that, and chose to take the low road the rest of the way in. The landing's gonna be a little rough, unless he figures out that the attacking isn't panning out.

I have finally decided on a candidate, and it ain't John Kerry(even though at first I thought - this guy's the one). But I do respect him and he is a wise and eloquent individual, with a clearly progresive record. I wish every one of our candidates luck, including Mr. Kerry. And I would back any of them, should they get the nomination, in a heartbeat.

ABB. Sing after me.

[DeanIsAPitbull]

89. Did you ask Kerry why he's still in the race?

[trumad]

91. Good job Will

Those questions prove that you're a hell of a Journalist. I was taking a long pause from DU but thought this important enough to hop back on and give you major props....

[bigtree]

92. I've read Will Pitt's articles focusing on Dean

They annoyed me. He had already announced that Kerry was his favorite. I just didn't want to hear about Dean. But, eventually the Kerry articles came around again,(my guy)and they were like music to me. The rest have been deliciously, anti-shrub.

I keep reading Will because he does try to balance, all of the good from the Democrats in one hand, and continues to smack Bush & Co. with the other hand.

And damn, doesn't he smack them good? And hard. I value Will's commitment and passion. He's up front and fighting for us. And he sure is fun to read.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

94. Pro-Kerry Biased Will Pitt Grills Dean Over Hell's BBQ

PITT: You mentioned your vocal opposition to the war in Iraq. There were a number of large anti-war rallies in Washington and elsewhere before the fighting started. Is there a reason you never put in an appearance at any of these rallies?

DEAN: Well, first of all I wasn't invited by the organizers. Second of all, I can guess that I had a schedule that was full of a whole lot of other things. I don't know. I didn't, because I wasn't asked.

PITT: Fair enough.

----------

How did Dean ever survive such a question?
How did he manage to go on living after such a
trouncing tortuosity of a shaking and a baking?
After that question, I could read no more because
I just couldn't bear to see a poor meek helpless
mope like Howard Dean be brutally torn apart
limb from limb from asunder by a sadistic pro-Kerry
executioner like Will Pitt. I'm sure the rest of
the interview was even worse and left Dean in
helpless bloody rags and pustules and Pitt laughing
demonically, but I just could read no more.

[Jerseycoa]

99. Come on

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that question.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

103. It was brutal as a wet nutal.

[David Zephyr]

97. Sort of Like Being the Cabin Boy on the Titantic, Huh?

To borrow a Mario Cuomo line, William.

[trix]

100. John Kerry is dreamy…

I love the pics of him windsurfing… he looks so presidential.

Bush can't even balance himself on solid ground.

[Scott Lee]

102. No, Wes Clark is dreeeaaammmmyyyyy

[robbedvoter]

110. Right you are!

[ViognierSipper]

104. I envy you

you were in the presence of someone will be a great president.

[Punkingal]

108. I would just like to say....

that I applaud Will for his honesty about who he supports for President. Are there people here who would prefer he be a hypocrite like all those on Fox News, who pretend to be "fair and balanced," when in fact they are the furthest thing from it? Will has nothing to hide, so he CAN be, and clearly IS, fair and balanced. The questions he asked the Senator were tough questions, and I see no reason for the criticism.

At any rate, he comes here to share things with us, as a member of DU, just like the rest of us, although he is our most famous member. (As far as we know!) I, for one, am grateful that he chooses to do so, and I wish others would be more civil. We are all united in our desire to get Bush out of office, after all.