Kerry speaks, the media attack

[Mass]

Karynnj has a post on the Kerry blog concerning the Kerry event in NYC yesterday night. It seems to have been a great event.

http://blog.johnkerry.com/2007/03/this_moment_on_earth_nyc_event.html

John and Teresa Kerry interviewed by Charlie Rose

Though billed as a talk with John Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry about their new book, the interview covered a broad range of topics, from the environment, to the situation in Iraq and the rest of the middle east and near east, to 2004 and 2008 politics. It was most interesting when the Kerrys succeeded in bring the conversation back to the environment.

thismomentonearth200x296.jpgIn explaining how the book started, Teresa Heinz Kerry spoke of how while campaigning in 2004, both she and John spoke to many people who were trying to do something about environmental problems in their communities. The book was designed to celebrate them and the hope they provided. Sen. Kerry spoke of hoping that we have reached the critical mass to make the changes needed and said that Al Gore deserves all the accolades given to him.

JK then said that the situation is more urgent than most people think. He spoke of having gone to a board meeting of scientists at the Heinz Foundation that Teresa heads last week and that even though he is a Senator, sitting on committees that have held hearings, he was stunned by the latest research. He spoke of how the feedback from Mother Nature has been unbelievably more than anticipated. He then described how the oceans have absorbed more than half of the carbon dioxide and have become more acidic and significantly warmer in our lifetime. In addition to melting the ice caps, he described problems like Spruce forests in Canada being infested by insects that previously could not have withstood the cold.

Only one problem, they invited reporters there. This gives us the totally out of topic blurb in radaronline and the New York Observer:

(still rambling)
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2007/03/kerry-nuanced-logic-now-in-book-form.php

Kerry's Nuanced Logic Now in Book Form
john_kerrry_031307_FRESH.jpg
STILL RAMBLIN' Kerry
John Kerry trekked to Manhattan's 92nd Street Y Monday night to talk up his new book about the environment, This Moment on Earth. Unfortunately for him, all anyone wanted to know was: If you're so smart, bub, how'd you manage to lose that easy-ass presidential election?

Addressing reporters during the reception beforehand, Kerry's communications director, Vince Morris, faced this problem head-on, warning would be muckrakers, "If he talks, he'll only talk about the event here or the book. Are you cool with that?"

They were. One asked how Kerry felt about the inevitable comparisons to former vice president Al Gore, whose film and book An Inconvenient Truth came out last year (and who also lost a winnable election to George W. Bush). "I applaud everything Al Gore's done, which has been superb," Kerry said, noting that Gore himself had written a back-cover blurb for him.

"What we're doing actually is a little different in the sense that he's focused, by and large, on global climate change, while what we're trying to do is show a broader group of issues that link to global climate change but are also freestanding, like the state of our fisheries, what's happening with farming practices, environmental injustices in the Bronx and a lot of other places." In other words, This Moment On Earth is less akin to An Inconvenient Truth than to Gore's Earth In The Balance, only 15 years less prescient.
...
Photo: Getty Images

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2007/03/kerrys-mythological-nonresponse.html

At an appearance yesterday evening at the 92nd Street Y to promote his new book on environmentalism, John Kerry talked about what he called the "mythology" surrounding his weak response to the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" during the 2004 presidential campaign.

Here's part of an exchange he had with moderator Charlie Rose:

CR: "I know you don't want to redo that campaign."

JK: "Actually I do. Let's go back and recount those votes."

CR: "That is my very first question. Did you win Ohio or not?"

JK: "I don't look backwards."

But just moments later...

CR: "Frequently, people say a stronger, faster response to Swift Boat might have put you in the White House."

JK: "Well, I've heard that. And there's a certain mythology around that and some people may say that's true. We did respond. People don't realize it. They attacked in May. We held a same-day, same-location press conference and put it to bed because what they said were lies. It went away. They came back in June. Again, we held a same-day, same-location press conference. We put it away. They didn't reappear again until August which is a couple of days after I accepted the nomination which is when I had a 13 week general election compared to George Bush's eight weeks because we had our nominating convention in the end of July. Theirs was the end of August. We didn't have the money. We weren't able to spend. We did respond -- we didn't do it enough. If there's a complaint that's legitimate is we should have put more money later into actually advertising against it. But the judgment was made that, number one, Americans wanted to hear something else about their future. And number two, the truth was out there and it had been answered. It was the wrong judgment. It's a miscalculation. You pay the price for it. I'm responsible. I take the blame. But we did respond. It just wasn't adequate."

-- Azi Paybarah


Posted by The Politicker on March 13, 2007 9:30 AM | Permalink

Next time, remember, reporters are useless. bloggers can report much better.

[TayTay]

1. New York Observer, not New Yorker

And the response from the Senator in that last page was excellent. One can only hope that is why the excerpt from the interview was titled Kerry's Mythological Non-Response.

The idea that there was no response is indeed mythological.

[beachmom]

2. I liked that response, too. And the DU Research Forum

backs it up -- they DID respond.

[ProSense]

3. Exactly!

Then when they came back in August, they got tons of free media coverage for a story that not only wasn't new, but also was already debunked as vicious lies with the facts already in the media's posession.

[karynnj]

4. The New York Observer reporter asked me a few questions

before the show. My answers clearly did not fit his preconceived ideas and were not included. He asked why I was there, Whose (!) button the 'Set a deadline.com" was - thanks Marjorie and how did I compare Kerry's work to Gore's. (My answers to all were what all of us here would say) He then asked what I did - and laughed at my answer - retired from "----" and now spend too much time watching CSPAN.

I commented on the the 2 websites in the OP.

What I didn't write in the thing for Violet (written in a rush because I had a morning Dentist appointment) was:

- Both Kerrys looked fantastic. Teresa look very pretty.

- It was so cute when Teresa spoke about Iowa. Rose asked Kerry what advise he would give the candidates and he gave a non answer. Teresa then was asked because she was more outspoken (or something). She first got an extremely mischievious smile then spoke of meeting so many people ion Iowa - and from that she thought what she would want as an "Iowan" was someone who would be honest, would say what was in his heart and have ideas. This totally paralleled what she said when she was asked about a Halperin/Harris comment about how heavy a book would be with all Kerry's 2004 mistakes (or something similar). Then she defended Kerry,said they had put their heart and soul into it said they almost won, and that he was a good person.

- We got a copy of the book autographed by both of them - but I haven't started reading it yet!

Sorry it took so long to come on here - it's been a semibusy day. (It was fun seeing the other JK group people.) I was an idiot and forgot my camera, but MBS took some pictures and she is returning to MA today.

[MBS]

5. I was there when Karen was questioned

the blogger-reporter raised his eyebrows , the very picture of skepticism, when Karen laid out the facts (all a matter of public record) on JK's long history of environmental commitment. So, alas , that tone of that report did not surprise me. JK is an ALLY of these people, don't they get it??? Just nuts. I'm about to sit down and write a PS to Karen's account, to send to johnkerry.com, along with the photos. Just got in, may take a few hours.

[TayTay]

6. What? No hugs?

Sigh!

[karynnj]

16. no hugs, but he signed books

[karynnj]

7. His eye brows did rise - and I thought that usually happened only in books

It was kind of funny. I was nervous, but still got the sense that the Gore quetion was almost sarcastic. Then after my answer he asked my name and "what I did". The funny thing is that that paper may have fewer readers than DailyKos. (I rarely ever see it on the newsstand in NYC)

[Mass]

8. You did an awesome job, karen.

[Mass]

9. One more: The New York Magazine

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2007/03/kerry_at_the_y_how_do_you_ask.html

Kerry at the Y: How Do You Ask a Species to Be the Last Species to Die for a Mistake?
20070313kerry.jpg

Kerry in January.Photo: Getty Images
What do politicians do between elections? They write (or "write") books filled with folksy uplift and anecdotes about their imaginary friends or real-life relatives. John Kerry's new tome, This Moment on Earth: Today's New Environmentalists and Their Vision for the Future, co-written with his wife, Teresa, belongs to this beatific genre — with one notable exception: It makes a bold retroactive case for its author as a leading environmentalist. Not only is Kerry a bona fide earth defender, it turns out, he's always been one. "As ranking member and Chairman of the Fish and Marine subcommittee," the book's jacket copy explains, "he was able to write or rewrite laws affecting national fisheries, flood insurance, marine mammals, coral reefs, the Gulf of Mexico dead zone." (Ah, there's the Kerry we remember!) We caught the senator at the 92nd Street Y last night before his Q&A session with Charlie Rose, and we were pleased to see that the new, environmentalist Kerry is still the same Kerry we've long known and, well, not loved, but at least donated to and campaigned for and had our hearts broken by. He's still smart, still stiff, and still frustratingly incapable of rendering a simple sound bite. After the jump, we try.

Who are these New Environmentalists and how do they differ from old ones?
They are a group of people coming from improbable places, for instance, a rancher in New Mexico, who was a Bush-Cheney coordinator in 2004 and a very conservative Republican; a 67-year-old Marine; CEOs of major corporations — 3M, Dupont. There's been an awakening on the grassroots level that can be marshaled into real action, with everyday Americans, regardless of political persuasion, all connected through this.

So, what you're saying is that environment's no longer a partisan issue?
Well, it depends on the attitude of people running, because the Republicans — I shouldn't say all Republicans — most Republicans in Washington — have embraced a do-nothing attitude about the environment, but, for example, one of my co-sponsors on the bill was Olympia Snowe, a Republican …

(With the same bad picture the New York Observer has. I guess that taking a picture of the two to include of the article was too expensive, in these times of digital photography :sarcasm:)

Well, this one seems to be aware of Kerry's background concerning the environment (a clear progress, compared to the two previous ones, but cannot avoid repeating media memes about Kerry being stiff and unable to make a sound byte. (which is probably why they use a a variation of 35 years soundbyte of the same Kerry as a title)

[MBS]

14. God this makes me furious

:wtf:His strong decades-long track record on the environment is a matter of public record , for Pete's sake. When I signed on to Kerry's campaign in October 2003 I already knew about that record: in fact , that was the initial reason I signed on! It's times like this I find myself muttering, "Our whole country has lost its mind".:banghead: And heart, too, it seems. I've sent johnkerry.com my photos, am working on my supplement to karynnj's piece . will take these unworthy stories (not karynnj's! the others) into account as I write mine. . GRRR:grr:

[karynnj]

15. This is typical New York magazine

I take the "bold retroactive" to be sarcasm. What this shows is that not only did the author not like Kerry in 2004, he didn't bother to even listen to the acceptance speech - where alternative fuels and the environment were possibly mentioned.


They are as cynical as Kerry is idealist. They are also politically braindead - going with whoever the cool kids likes and snarking about anyone else. (In fact, a major political article in 2006 before the election - completely missing the shift to Democrat that was apparent in any poll or random conversation with your friends - that we needed a purple party. They then had a list of possible purple candidates - the author's favorite (if I remember right) was Bob Kerrey, because he couldn't be swiftboated (!!)

[MBS]

17. the cynical media. .

Kerrygoddess posted an interesting interview with Dan Rather, wherein he takes on the gutless, lapdog media
.http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5460#comments

You'll see there my somewhat incoherent response, whose thesis is that the journalistic snarks and the lapdogs are really two sides of the same cynical coin, in both cases leading to passivity and lack of interest in, and lack of respect for, the truth.

[Mass]

10. Kerry at the Y: How Do You Ask a Species to Be the Last Species to Die for a Mistake?

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2007/03/kerry_at_the_y_how_do_you_ask.html

Kerry at the Y: How Do You Ask a Species to Be the Last Species to Die for a Mistake?


Kerry in January.Photo: Getty Images
What do politicians do between elections? They write (or "write") books filled with folksy uplift and anecdotes about their imaginary friends or real-life relatives. John Kerry's new tome, This Moment on Earth: Today's New Environmentalists and Their Vision for the Future, co-written with his wife, Teresa, belongs to this beatific genre — with one notable exception: It makes a bold retroactive case for its author as a leading environmentalist. Not only is Kerry a bona fide earth defender, it turns out, he's always been one. "As ranking member and Chairman of the Fish and Marine subcommittee," the book's jacket copy explains, "he was able to write or rewrite laws affecting national fisheries, flood insurance, marine mammals, coral reefs, the Gulf of Mexico dead zone." (Ah, there's the Kerry we remember!) We caught the senator at the 92nd Street Y last night before his Q&A session with Charlie Rose, and we were pleased to see that the new, environmentalist Kerry is still the same Kerry we've long known and, well, not loved, but at least donated to and campaigned for and had our hearts broken by. He's still smart, still stiff, and still frustratingly incapable of rendering a simple sound bite. After the jump, we try.

Who are these New Environmentalists and how do they differ from old ones?
They are a group of people coming from improbable places, for instance, a rancher in New Mexico, who was a Bush-Cheney coordinator in 2004 and a very conservative Republican; a 67-year-old Marine; CEOs of major corporations — 3M, Dupont. There's been an awakening on the grassroots level that can be marshaled into real action, with everyday Americans, regardless of political persuasion, all connected through this.

So, what you're saying is that environment's no longer a partisan issue?
Well, it depends on the attitude of people running, because the Republicans — I shouldn't say all Republicans — most Republicans in Washington — have embraced a do-nothing attitude about the environment, but, for example, one of my co-sponsors on the bill was Olympia Snowe, a Republican …

(With the same bad picture the New York Observer has. I guess that taking a picture of the two to include of the article was too expensive, in these times of digital photography :sarcasm:)
At least he has read the book and understands what it is about, a clear progress, compared to the two previous ones, but cannot avoid repeating media memes about Kerry being stiff and unable to make a soundbyte. (which is probably why they use a a variation of 35 years soundbyte of the same Kerry as a title):eyes:

[blm]

11. What an idiot - claims he has long known Kerry but no one knew he was a longtime environmentalist?

What a lying asshat.

He blames Kerry for what reporters DON'T KNOW as they claim to know him well.

[blm]

12. What an idiot - claims he has long known Kerry but no one knew he was a longtime environmentalist?

What a lying asshat.

He blames Kerry for what reporters DON'T KNOW as they claim to know him well.

[Mass]

13. I did not interpret it like that. I thought he was saying he knew of his record.

I guess I gave too much credit to the author. Reading this with new eyes, I can see the snark!

[karynnj]

18. I just noticed something -

He states that Kerry is still frustratingly incapable of rendering a simple sound bite. Yet look at his title. If there is a soundbite from anyone that encapsalates the fundamental question of Vietnam, it is John Kerry's stark, awesome question that cut to the heart of everything.

What Kerry doesn't do is market tested slogans with no meaning. But we could easily compile a list of things Kerry said first:
- There is no military solution, you need a political solution
- Our soldiers should not be going door to door in a Civil War
- "outsourcing" the war effort to warlords


As to soundbites - can he beat "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time"

By the way - I did not see him as stiff. I also think that the questions, especially those on foreign policy were not questions that could be answers with a laugh and a smile. The things Kerry wanted to speak of - the people he met and their actions - would lead to a more light hearted conversation.

[Mass]

20. Absolutely. This is really gossip reporting at its worse.

[Mass]

19. For an event that they want to dismiss, sure these magazines speak a lot about it

Here is another one from the New York Observer (2 the same day!. For the rest, they could not find other people supportive of Kerry. Apparently, he forgot everything about Karyn.

Bravo to Teresa for her comment. I agree, I feel sorry for America.
http://www.observer.com/20070319/20070319_Azi_Paybarah_politics_newsstory3.asp

For Kerry, It’s Always 2004
At a book appearance at the Y, he gets mixed review
By Azi Paybarah
/ Click Here!


Getty Image
John Kerry.
John Kerry was at the 92nd Street Y this week, ostensibly to talk about his new book about environmentalism. But it didn’t take long for moderator Charlie Rose to steer the conversation to the subject that Mr. Kerry must be thoroughly sick of discussing by now: the 2004 election.

“Frequently, people say a stronger, faster response to Swift Boat might have put you in the White House,” said Mr. Rose, slouching slightly in his chair with purple tie falling to the side. (Teresa Heinz sat between Mr. Rose and her husband with her hands folded, often staring out to the ranks of the paying audience.)

...

Later, Mr. Rose read a scathing excerpt from a recent book—The Way to Win, by Mark Halperin and John Harris—that called Mr. Kerry “a case study” in how not to run for President.

(Ms. Heinz’s response: “If all John Kerry is is a case study, I’m sorry for America.”)

...


But there were some fans. “I said to him, ‘Would you do me a favor and run again and save my kids?’” said Manhattan public-school teacher Elizabeth Sweeney. “He just smiled and said, ‘No. Thank you for what you do.’ He was very nice.”

[wisteria]

22. I will never buy into the media idea that Kerry ran a bad campaign.

It is a damn shame that he continues to get pelted for doing nothing more than running for president to try and change this country for the better. The media played more of a role in Kerry's loss than Kerry did.
I don't know much about Halperin and Harris, but I bet they were no help to him in 2004.

[karynnj]

26. The reviews I heard were mixed differently than his

I, at least have the sense to realize the views I heard were not random. As to the Little Rock corporate executive - note she's a CORPORATE EXECUTIVE and from Little Rock. She missed something if she came out thinking the difference was that Clinton would have worked the crowd. That IS likely true, but Kerry would not have had Bill Clinton's environmental record if he had been Governor of Arkansas (or proudly flown back to execute a severely retarded man), nor would he have lied to the entire country repeatedly for 6 months.

She also misses that Rose directed the questions away from the stories of people engaged in good work that the Kerrys obviously wanted to highlight to foreign policy and politics. The foreign policy situation is very grim now and Kerry answered thoughtfully and honestly. The political questions were asked in the most negative way possible - and Teresa was fantastic and was cheered for her response on this. Rose specifically asked Teresa to respond to the Halpern/Harris comment). The real comparison, given those questions, would be to Clinton's Wallace interview - and the Kerrys handled it with far more class. Rose, not the Kerrys, set the tone by constantly pulling them from speaking of the book.

Odd as it may seem, some people in the audience were Charlie Rose fans. In the ladies room, I heard 2 woman discussing how they loved his voice - and were stunned when it became clear they were speaking of Rose. So, it is significant that the Kerrys got a lot of applause when they fought back on those points. (Someone said after the show that Rose had been extremely rude to Gore in an earlier interview.)

But if the choice is insincere pandering to crowd, which Clinton does excel at or integrity, values and commitment to the country and world rather than self aggrandizement, it is a very easy choice.

[Island Blue]

21. Well at least this is positive.

They even mention setadeadline.com.

John Kerry in Manhattan

Senator John Kerry (and his wife Teresa) are currently touring the country to promote their new book, This Moment on Earth; last night, as part of that effort, they did a public sit-down with Charlie Rose at the 92nd Street Y.

John Kerry gives the impression of a man freed from fetters; that's not a coincidence, given that he's decided to withdraw his hat from the 2008 ring. Whether the country is well-served by that is another question entirely, but it certainly seems to be working for him. There's a new looseness there, for want of a better expression, a feeling that he can now say what he wants to say without fear of consequences. In part, this new ability to speak his mind without having to parse every statement has led him to a position of leadership on Iraq - check out SetaDeadline.com - and one that's coincidentally far ahead of any of the current contenders for the Oval Office (cough Hillary cough); it's also in part manifest in this new book.

http://dailygotham.com:80/blog/bouldin/john_kerry_in_manhattan

[MBS]

23. That was a decent piece

I met him very very briefly before the lecture he seemed like a nice guy. . someone who seemed like he actually listened and observed. . you know, the things that journalists are supposed to do.

[karynnj]

24. That one is really really nice

MBS, didn't we meet him? I remember someone explaining what "Daily Gotham was"

Anyway - at the bottom of the page there was a little link to digg it - so you can digg it.
http://digg.com/environment/John_and_Teresa_Kerry_speak_about_the_environment

[MBS]

25. yes, I have a photo

have an important appt at work, will try to get my piece done before that, more likely will be finished this afternoon. Sorry, things are really busy right now

[MarjorieG]

27. Thanks to Karennj, a limitless resource. Glad you were there.

When I think we were questioning about whether we should attend, intrude on the pre-party, just imagine those pieces without any input. Something about working for the so-called reputable press, maybe as paid, needing to look edgily sophisticated, but really just snarky.

So many have pre-conceived opinion they think people need to hear again and again, or they're not accurate or trusted. As if to honestly commend the Kerrys would betray a shared truth that is just media malarky. Daring even to say they made sense, when the subjects required full answers.

What is it about reporters, that they never just report what they see.

Anyway, stellar reports in support of the truth, and the Kerrys, to both you and to MBS (at johnkerry.com).

[karynnj]

28. I am proud that MBS and I did report far more

of what really happened than any of the reporters did. MBS really really captured how the Kerrys responded to the questions. They were absolutely incredible, especially as you would expect something billed as a "talk" and which was to focus on the book would have been far friendlier. There were some people in the audience who did shout out to speak on the book.