Really great Boston Globe story. "Kerry becomes a bridge-builder"

[TayTay]

This was "above the fold" in the http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/06/29/colleagues_say_kerry_is_in_midcareer_metamorphosis/">Boston Globe on June 29, 2009

Kerry becomes a bridge-builder
Forges connections in Mass. and Senate

For decades, Kerry has been dogged by a reputation for a lack of interest in local affairs and aloofness around his Senate colleagues - an attitude that, combined with his patrician habits, often got him labeled as arrogant. Even when he rode the strength of his foreign policy experience and the drama of his personal story to his party’s presidential nomination, a lack of affection for him hampered his candidacy.

But the Kerry who returned to the Senate from the presidential trail was a different man, many colleagues noted, and now, with his presidential ambitions behind him and the senior colleague who long dominated his state sidelined by cancer, Kerry is experiencing what fellow lawmakers describe as a midcareer metamorphosis.

Long regarded as a loner, Kerry now lingers on the Senate floor during votes, talking with colleagues. Once known more for his solo speeches on the floor, Kerry for months has been leading weekly strategy sessions with other senators to find consensus on a climate change bill - a tactic usually identified with Senator Edward M. Kennedy - and following up with friendly meetings with individual senators to address their objections.

Kerry’s Senate schedule is heavily packed with hearings, speeches and international travel associated with his new role as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But in Massachusetts, Kerry has taken an elevated role, keeping in close contact with local officials and securing federal grants for in-state projects. His staff has been directed to hold “office hours’’ in more than 350 communities, and has completed about 200 of the sessions this year to hear constituent concerns.

And on a personal level, Kerry’s Capitol Hill colleagues say, the five-term senator looks happier than he has in years, bustling around Washington with renewed vigor. Having failed to win the presidency in 2004 - and making a wrenching decision not to seek the job again in 2008 - the 65-year-old Kerry has embraced his role as the Senate’s leading foreign policy voice, while protecting the ailing Kennedy’s vision for healthcare overhaul on the Senate Finance Committee, one of the panels writing the legislation.

Now that's the story I've been waiting to see for quite a while. What took you so long to see that Globbies?

[Luftmensch067]

1. From the Globe, it's practically a love letter

Despite the snide, backhanded cracks it's filled with. The comments are mostly from the usual basement hate brigade, but there a few great ones. I just left one, on page NINE. Yeah, no one in this state has ANY interest in John Kerry. :-)

[TayTay]

2. If they have no interest, then why are they reading this

The people who leave comments claiming non interest in something are really funny.

If they had one once of a sense of irony, they would see how utterly silly they sound. Honestly, if no one is paying attention, then why the front page story on the Globe and why would that person read the story?

Great article. Actually, the snark is classic Globe "passive-aggressive" but the new, dare we say it, near, ahm, well, sentiment hints of something else. Something nicely welcome, imho.

Great article. Really does recognize what is there.

[beachmom]

3. Thanks, reading now. But don't forget the photo gallery!!

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/gallery/06_29_kerry/

"A day in the life of Senator John F. Kerry"

First pic involves wearing glasses. :)

Edit: also a pic of a personal note from Barack Obama along with the Inauguration ticket:

To John & Teresa - I'm here because of you! Thanks - Barack Obama.

Okay, as soon as I get through the pics, I promise to read the article. :)

[Luftmensch067]

5. LOVE these!!!

Thanks for the reminder!

[karynnj]

9. Thans for mentioning them - I hadn't noticed the link - and they are great

[ProSense]

15. Thanks for the link.

Beautiful!

[Inuca]

17. BO's note

very nice and very TRUE

[YvonneCa]

4. "Above the fold"....

...It's about time! :) Thank you for posting this...it is a great article which treats your senator with the respect he deserves.

[karynnj]

6. This is great

This reinforces what they seemed to use to say only after nipping at his ankles for years when they wrote glowing endorsements.
There are many things there that they are giving him credit for that I haven't seen as prominently in any mainstream article. The two most important for me are these:

The 65-year-old Kerry has embraced his role as the Senate’s leading foreign policy voice, while protecting the ailing Kennedy’s vision for healthcare overhaul on the Senate Finance Committee, one of the panels writing the legislation.

which is great for quoting in the various threads - likely to continue - blasting Kerry on healthcare, in spite of his position and it is great to see a completely not qualified in anyway comment that he is the leading foreign policy voice in the Senate.

and

Kerry for months has been leading weekly strategy sessions with other senators to find consensus on a climate change bill - a tactic usually identified with Senator Edward M. Kennedy - and following up with friendly meetings with individual senators to address their objections.

Both stating the fact that he has been the leader on this and the description of him working to address objections is great - and brings back the work he and Snowe did to get the CAFE standard increase.

But this is really special to read - I don't know how many others got similar notes, but it is sweet.

And the White House now? There is no wistfulness in Kerry’s face or voice as he discusses the Oval Office - just pride as he points out a note Obama hand-wrote to Kerry and his wife, Teresa, after the election: “I’m here because of you,’’ the note reads.

[TayTay]

10. I agree with all your points

This is my favorite paragraph:

And on a personal level, Kerry’s Capitol Hill colleagues say, the five-term senator looks happier than he has in years, bustling around Washington with renewed vigor. Having failed to win the presidency in 2004 - and making a wrenching decision not to seek the job again in 2008 - the 65-year-old Kerry has embraced his role as the Senate’s leading foreign policy voice, while protecting the ailing Kennedy’s vision for healthcare overhaul on the Senate Finance Committee, one of the panels writing the legislation.

Yup, doing double-time to protect his friend Teddy Kennedy's legacy on health care and to see that Teddy's vision is honored.

And I have never seen the good and true Senator happier. Swear to God. I am so glad to see this, finally, in print. It's is a joy to see in person as well. (And some did see it. That was one happy guy last November, at dawn, casting a vote for the next President of the US.)

[wisteria]

18. He deserved more than a note from our president. n/t

[wisteria]

7. Pleasantly surprised to see this on a Monday morning. Very complimentary piece. n/t

[Blaukraut]

8. Wonderful piece!

I think that most of us here have always known the John Kerry that is being described as having emerged recently. Standing in Ted's shadow couldn't have been easy, and reading about how both Teddy's and JK's staffers admit that Ted was guarding his projects rather jealously (imo) only proves that it wasn't for lack of will that Kerry took more of a hands-off approach when it came to dealing with local and domestic issues.

I don't know about you guys, but this Globe Piece makes me feel vindicated. 'Yeah, this guy really does care, and I'm glad you folks are finally seeing it and appreciate him!'

[TayTay]

11. Ah, yes it does.

We saw it before. You should feel vindicated.

And the Globe is late in acknowledging this, but at least they did acknowledge it. And there is a different feel around the good Senator these days. And it is really great to see. It's a "right person, right place, right time" thing and I am very happy for him. (But he had to live through some very dark and lonely times to get here. And he knows who helped in those times. Honest, he really does.)

[sandnsea]

12. That is so nice

I'm glad he's happy - but I can't help wondering that standing around chatting after a vote makes so much difference. I mean these people are Senators and they still need their egos stroked? Do they not have important things to do??

Anyways, whatever it takes to get JK the appreciation he so richly deserves. He's still the only person up there that I trust about 95%, although Merkley is doing a great job so far.

[TayTay]

13. LOL, I understand

Sometimes you learn the darndest things in random conversations. There is a definite value in lingering around people and sharing small talk or chit-chat. That can be a gateway, however tiny, into another person and what is going on in their lives, what they care about, their worries and their hopes. Common cause is often forged not in books and formal ceremonies, but in finding common humanity. Even on the Senate floor, I guess.

Taking the time to linger a little bit longer can be a very great thing to do. It can yield the darndest things. Honest.

[YvonneCa]

14. This is how divisiveness is diminished and unity...

...is built.

I am one citizen who has noticed the difference, and it is happening (IMHO) because of the small things that...I believe...are deliberately being done in Congress, DC as a whole and between people and organizations. The 'lingering' to talk and find commonalities... the frank, open discussions of issues... the inclusion of all in those discussions... the events Obama has created to bring people together... Kerry, Biden, Michelle Obama reaching out to include people...the list is endless.

These things were either EXCLUSIVE or did not happen during the last administration. It's a completely different way of operating...maybe prevalent in the past...which I am glad is being revived.

[ProSense]

16. Excellent piece.

Glad they finally see the Kerry we always knew existed.

I'm glad he was a loner, it's what has kept him from becoming cynical and bent on defending the status quo.

Well-deserved praise for a great Senator.

[wisteria]

19. It is a shame that people outside of Mass will not get a chance to hear anything about this piece.

People ask me all the time what the Senator is up to because they haven't "heard" from him in a long time. This is disheartening to me, because it seemed he had become more localized and less national. This article confirms it for me - C'est la vie. If he is happy that is nice.

[karynnj]

20. Actually he is both

They are praising him for the work he does for MA, but they also speak of him leading the meetings on climate change and being the top foreign policy voice. Being the leader on these two broad areas - when we are involved in 2 wars, trying to get peace in teh middle east and dealing with more fp crises than I ever remember happing at the same time - is major. hat he is the Senate leader on that and has a strong relationship with Obama means he is a very influential Senator.

The article seems to be making the analogy to Kennedy, who was a major leader in the Senate on national interests and did a great job helping his constituents. For Kerry to be depicted as becoming like Kennedy, on the things Kennedy is the best in the Senate on is high praise - and setting the bar very very high. (Look at the Senate, how many other Senators have the status where that type of comment would not be laughed at.)

One thing that might hamper his visibility, but certainly not his contributions, is that his strongest area (and his chair) is foreign policy. When a decision is made, the President owns it - and will get the blame or the credit. But, contributions do become known to the people within the beltway. Kerry had majored diplomatic successes with Syria and Sudan. He has also contributed to policy with his hearings that provided input. In addition, look at the crisis in Iran - who took the lead in expressing the intellectual basis for the Obama position (in a NYT op-ed)? Many pundits, some possibly coincidentally, mentioned exactly the points he made to defend it.

The real accomplishment may have been influencing Obama's opinion on this - unless they were simply both in the same position to begin with. (and then his value was that it helps to have another resected person agree with you, when part of your own team doesn't)

I also wonder if Obama's rejection of over 50 years of policy in Latin America reflects Kerry influence.

[beachmom]

21. No, Wisteria is talking about COVERAGE of John Kerry. It is definitely more local

coverage with little to no national coverage. The BG article got no traction in the blogosphere. No coverage on lib blogs, Memeorandum, no TV coverage, nothing. It was mentioned in an item on MSNBC's First Read, but that is a political junkie site. I mean, except policy articles where Kerry plays an important role, you're just not going to be hearing much about Kerry, and that is only if like you and me, you look for it.

No sense in going Pollyanna about this: John Kerry is a highly influential Senator, but as far as being a national star politician, that has completely waned. Yes, people know who he is (but that will continue to decline as 2004 becomes a more distant memory), but what he has to say is no longer TV news. Or even in Time magazine.

And, you know, I don't have a problem with that. Nor does John Kerry. If you're not President and your name isn't Kennedy, you simply are not going to be famous. Which, given that Kerry will not be President, is a good thing. Fame is overrated, and is in general, a bad thing (just watch a few minutes of coverage of Michael Jackson's death to be reminded of this). The more anonymous John Kerry becomes (while becoming MORE powerful behind the scenes) the better. Sure the Right attacks him now and again. But only in a minor way. With his star fading, so are the attacks. And he gets to to do the work he so enjoys. I hope that that work will be recognized in a book by a great author one day, but even that will only be for American history junkies.

I loved this BG article, and it has made me quite happy this week. But it is clearly a "local boy made good" article. And someone in PA or GA is not going to know anything about it. Heck, with BG's circulation way down, nor will a lot of MA residents.

[wisteria]

22. Exactly.

It saddens me to realize that his life work will only get minor notice in the course of our contry's history. Fame may be overrated, but many still strive for it. An example, H. Clinton an awful SOS, yet her name will be recorded in the anals of history as having been the SOS during a turning point in our country's relastionship with the Middle East. And, she will be given credit for it. No one cares about the underlings. However, respect is a good thing and JK seems to have earned it from some in the media and in Washington.
But, even sadder is that with time, many of us here will begin to post less and less and JK will become a distant,but found memory. I will always believe and never forget that he should have become our President and it was a cruel, cruel twist of fate and deceit that we were saddled with the worst president in our history for an additional four years.

[TayTay]

23. This is true, but there is more

The national media tracks people who are going to run for President someday. John Kerry is not going to run for President again. So, the national media and the blogs will cover him as a national political figure when he has input on national issues, such as foreign policy. He is officially a "Party Elder" and "gray eminence" of the Democratic Party and of Washington, DC. His voice matters in so far as he is making news on national issues or commenting on people who are going to run for President someday.

This is the media culture we have. It is not likely to change any time soon. However, the national media coverage is also shallow and there is a great need to fight that. This is what the blogs and Web 2.0 media (3.0 now with Twitter?) is exactly set up to do.

Sen. Kerry has sway and influence in the Senate. His voice will matter as to how health care and education and energy and climate change and immigration and other policy for the United States is set. There are those who understand this and pay attention to it. There are those who will not look for anyone involved in national policy below the first level of the Administration and Party leaders in the Congress (Reid, Peloi, etc.)

We do not teach civics in this country. Our own system of government and how it runs is not well understood by our own citizens, including members of the media. The cheapest possible way to "cover" DC news is to have "talking heads" yell at each other on TV and to have one sided radio talk shows that exist to preach to their own choirs and ignore the opinions of other sides in a debate. In that atmosphere, Senators occupy a sort of shelf that is near, but not at the top level. This is how it is.

There is good and bad in everything and so there is in this. We saw it last week. Why would anyone on the Left care what Sen. Kerry had to say about a trigger in public health if his voice did not matter? Why would Sarah Palin care about a joke unless she wanted to feed off the left-over feelings the Right has for Kerry and exploit them to her own ends. Fame giveth and fame taketh away.

Sen. Kerry has the power to help consider things like renewing the Law of the Sea Conventions with the United Nations. This treaty is coming up for renewal and it is incredibly important. However, you will be hard-pressed to hear about this on the news. (Unless we get into a bizarre anti-UN "black helicopters" thing again with wingnuts on the Right.) That does not mean that this is not critical work that touches on foreign policy, conservation, climate change, issues about food and poverty and so forth. But it involves research, attention to policy detail and knowledge of how issues relate. The national media is simply not financed, equipped or staffed at the present time to cover this issue, nor will it be at any time in the near future. Sen. Kerry, as Chair of SFRC, has the power to bring or not bring this important treaty to the Senate floor and to dictate terms on it. It is important whether or not the media looks at it. (There are 2 or 3 other renewal treaties with the UN that the US has to sign on to, including the Climate Change stuff that will go into and out of Copenhagen in the fall. Either he likes it and urges it to pass the SFRC and the Senate or he doesn't and it fails before it even begins. That is power.)

[beachmom]

24. Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that what Kerry is doing is a big deal,

and that small manipulations of his name (public option trigger, Palin joke) will pop up from time to time.

I also think that the lack of civics in this country is depressing. But here is the amazing thing I realized which I gleemed from the Michael Jackson coverage on cable. My thoughts were: hell, the DC gossip press corps can put a sentence together better than the Hollywood types, but other than that, there's not much of a difference. I swear the only difference between the SERIOUS NEWS of U.S. politics and the TABLOID NEWS of celebrities is that payments are given to tabloid publications for scoops (and yes, there are overlaps, with politicians, but largely it is devoted to celebrities) AND many DC reporters are better writers. Other than that, it's the same crap. It's not like they are discussing policy or anything.

As to Web 2.0, color me unimpressed. Web 2.0 is Huffington Post, who along with their Kerry "scoop" this week had a big MJ expose about his ex-wife, or the liberal whiners who really will not be recruiting new members their style is so unlikeable. I will give Kerry credit to understanding the new world, and doing interviews with Huff Po on policy, but overall, the new world looks a lot like the old one, with less journalistic standards (which weren't that great to begin with).

[TayTay]

27. DC: Hollywood for Ugly People

That is an old aphorism that has very true roots. It is covered pretty much the way you said. The Monica story of the late '80's was covered like a Hollywood scandal. The Sanford and Ensign and Edwards and so forth scandals are much more covered than the Energy/Climate Change bill. It will always be that way because we understand the basics of a sex scandal intuitively and the basics of US Energy policy very little. And one makes good tv and the other doesn't.

I think we are about to leave Web 1.0 behind. I think the Firedoglake and DKos folks know this and understand they are part of a maturing media that will have to share space with the new stuff from IM, Twitter, Facebook and so forth. The blogs have matured and been through 2 or 3 election cycles. They are no longer the newest kids on the block. Their readers and audience are now known quantities. We roughly know the conservatives blogs and the liberal blogs and we know the dividing lines between them.

Web 2.0 is more interactive than 1.0 was and it relies more on immediacy than the blogs did. (Again, for better and for worse.) Lefty blogs are not going away, but they are going to have video and IM and Twitter and Facebook layered in with them and they have to change to adapt to that. Lefty blogs are places where in depth information can be written and read. That fills a need. But there is also a need for the short and sweet info alert. These media have to learn to live together. That is happening now and it will be a process.

BTW, no one in DC, including Obama, is currently very good at reaching the online, twittering audience out there. Obama did well in the campaign, but that was a campaign and the intent on that was to enable small cells to self-organize for the primary and then the purpose was to bring in money. There is no large, on-going effort that understands how to use the online world to aid in governing. No one in DC is doing this. The traditional 3rd party orgs also don't use this media well. No one does. No one. It is still a-borning, imho. The Obama folks are trying to figure out how to do this, but so far I would give them a C- for the effort and that is generous.

(Very TayTay like observation: The relationship between the blogs and politicians reminds me of the relationship between Prof Higgins and Eliza Doolittle in "My Fair Lady." Who created who and why do we have to put on our best manners for these creatures we co-created?

Before: Higgins (Professional Pols) luring Eliza (netroots) in:

Professor Henry Higgins: Eliza, you are to stay here for the next six months learning to speak beautifully, like a lady in a florist's shop. If you work hard and do as you're told, you shall sleep in a proper bedroom, have lots to eat, and money to buy chocolates and go for rides in taxis. But if you are naughty and idle, you shall sleep in the back kitchen amongst the black beetles, and be wolloped by Mrs. Pearce with a broomstick. At the end of six months you will be taken to Buckingham Palace, in a carriage, beautifully dressed. If the king finds out you are not a lady, you will be taken to the Tower of London, where your head will be cut off as a warning to other presumptuous flower girls! But if you are not found out, you shall have a present... of, ah... seven and six to start life with as a lady in a shop. If you refuse this offer, you will be the most ungrateful, wicked girl, and the angels will weep for you.

Middle: What is the vision and task here anyway?:

Professor Henry Higgins: I know your head aches; I know you're tired; I know your nerves are as raw as meat in a butcher's window. But think what you're trying to accomplish. Think what you're dealing with. The majesty and grandeur of the English language, it's the greatest possession we have. The noblest thoughts that ever flowed through the hearts of men are contained in its extraordinary, imaginative, and musical mixtures of sounds. And that's what you've set yourself out to conquer Eliza. And conquer it you will.

Eliza all grown up and mad because Higgins can't see she is::

ELIZA. That's not the proper answer to give me!
HIGGINS. It's the only answer you'll get until you stop being a plain idiot. If you're going to be a lady, you'll have give up feeling neglected if the men you know don't spend half their time snivelling over you and the other half giving you black eyes. You find me cold, unfeeling, selfish, don't you? Well be off with you to the sort of people you like. Marry some sentimental hog with lots of money and a thick pair of lips to kiss you with and a thick pair of boots to kick you with. If you can't appreciate what you've got, you'd better get what you can appreciate.
ELIZA Oh, I can't talk to you; you always turn everything against me; I'm always in the wrong; but don't be too sure that you have me under your feet to be trampled on and talked down. I'll marry Freddie, I will, as soon as I'm able to support him.

Sorry for that diversion, but honestly, because with the Galatea's you make; they tend to develop minds and egos of their own. LOL!

[TayTay]

28. Formal apologies for that last post

But I thought more of lines of dialogue from Shaw and My Fair Lady in the last few years than just about any other play. The tug of ware between teacher and pupil is very evident in politics and it is evident in the relationship between politicians and professionals and the amateurs online. Who is now molding whom?

[YvonneCa]

29. But you hit on something important here...

...that is apparent in the cable media. They are trying to make sense of this, as well. And, just like politicians, I think they miss two VERY important thoughts:

1. We aren't just here because we like politics. Did you even notice how cable shows now advertise that they have the 'best political coverage'? It's as if they think that's what has drawn people into watching TV such as C-Span, Countdown, and even Fox. And if they just copy what Olbermann did (for example) they will do well. Some of us really DISLIKE politics. We got here out of concern for our country's future...things that happened that shouldn't in a democracy. I think the right and left have that in common. If cable TV disintegrates into copies of Olbermann-type shows...we all lose.

2. We aren't a JUST a medium to be 'figured out' (bloggers, or twits, or whatever). We are citizens. That shouldn't be forgotten in the shuffle to understand and utilize technology. Because of this, I am concerned that the emphasis on Twitter-like responses may not truly express the will of the citizenry. It worries me that TV is starting to place such emphasis on it...not that it isn't a good tool, useful as it was in Iran...but because it's overuse may distort (to someone's advantage or disadvantage) where citizens actually stand on a given issue.

[YvonneCa]

26. "We do not teach civics in this country. Our own system of government ...

... and how it runs is not well understood by our own citizens, including members of the media."

This is a crime, IMHO. And teachers cry out EVERY DAY about it as an equity issue, its importance in a democracy, and the fact that NCLB (maybe not in intent, but in practice) has made the problem WORSE. That is one reason why I think it is critical to involve actual teachers...not just unions...in fixing public education.

Thank you for your very informative post. :

[wisteria]

30. I am not disputing that Senator Kerry willl be influential in making needed changes.

And,he seems to have accepted his fate and has run with it happily. It is just as I said though, he will never be recognized for the visionary and important person he is by a majority in this country. As his national star fades what is left are the lies of the Bush team that Kerry will forever be remember by, stupid jokes, flip flopper, frenchie etc.and Kerry will never have an opportunity to prove these lies wrong. No one will cover who he really is.

I hate to rain on his parade and those people here from Mass, but this is how I see it. It is wonderful he will do great things that will change this country, it is not wonderful that others less desearving will get the accolades and the media attention.
But, I knew this when I decided to stick around. Now, I am here if he needs me for something. I think I at least owe him that.

[beachmom]

31. I know I am "mixing" celebrity talk and politics, but consider this:

Michael Jackson reached THE pinnacle in the pop world. #1 international star. "The King of Pop". In the hey day of the '80s, no one was more recognized than him. And what happened? The fame destroyed him. Yes, there were other factors, but the power, the money, the fame became self destructive.

I am not suggesting that this has to happen to every person who becomes recognized and famous. But there is a large price to pay for it. Some people can survive it, but being anonymous or at least less famous is better.

I just think Kerry is where he should be. He is too good for that rif raff. And, he has considerable power now, without all the baggage of constantly being on TV, constantly being attacked.

Or I will put it one more way: yes it is a loss that he is not President or in a higher profile BUT the upside is he has some semblance of privacy, and that goes for his girls, too.

[wisteria]

32. We will have to agree to disagree. I think he has accepted his place

and has come to appreciate what it has to offer-not looking back. In that respect, I would have to assume he is happy as others claim and Teresa who was always supportive, but not thrilled about the notoriety is probably happy also. I will never believe however, that he is where he should be-IMO,circumstances decided this for him.
I won't go into Jackson, he is a sad, special case who never had a chance to live a normal life. I don't think it was the fame that killed him.

But, what does it all matter? I digress with posts like these. I just think it is so sad to see Kerry's star fading and people forgetting what a great man he is. With Kerry's light going out,I find myself less and less interested in what goes on in Washington and can not get excited about the current power players. None measure up in my estimation.

[beachmom]

36. I understand, and know how you feel. But I feel like that loss was in 2004

and that is when fate was decided.

Regardless, I do enjoy seeing what he is up to, since overall his politics coincide with mine, and he is a politician of rare integrity.

[karynnj]

25. I agree - I did misunderstand

I also agree that unless he were planning to run for President, it doesn't make much difference - and I can imagine that there is far less pressure on him and more ability to be himself.

[wisteria]

33. No it doesn't make much difference to many people, but it does to me.

And, it has nothing to do with him running for president.
I suppose because I saw something so special in Senator Kerry that I had not seen in a candidate in my lifetime, I feel he still has the potential to do something that will gain the respect and admiration of a majority of Americans. But, apparently others do not feel this is important and believe he is best working behind the scenes unnoticed. I understand, I just wish I could share this opinion with you all. It would make me feel a lot better.

[Luftmensch067]

34. I understand what you're saying

For me, it is the injustice of it that drives me crazy. How can someone do nothing but good and be met with so much hate and indifference? How can someone who cares so much and does such extraordinary service be ignored and used as everyone's scapegoat? It is NOT fair and it is intensely frustrating to me to see it.

I still feel great joy that I perceive the Senator to be happy and fulfilled right now, that he and his family have a modicum of privacy they would not have had, even while I mourn for what our country could -- should -- have had.

I understand and I agree with much of what you say. I wish for more recognition for JK and acknowledgement of what a great, good man he is. But, in the end, a happy life is not a bad reward...

[wisteria]

37. I was being selfish I suppose. It is about what the Senator is happy doing.

My opinion really amounts to very little. It is hard sometimes to reconcile the past with the present. I catch myself digressing and wanting to hold on to the past. The Senator has moved on, but I find it more difficult at times especially when I see less deserving people get accolades that Senator Kerry is entitled to.

[karynnj]

38. I think we are all there sometimes - I know I am

Also, Kerry likely still would have rather he became President as well - even with all the burden on a person and his/her family that entails. That he was willing to spend another 4 years essentially running from 2004 through 2008 (until he opted out in 2007 - for the good of the country) shows how much he wanted it. But one of the really nice things about him is that he really can move on, happy that he has a major, fullfilling role. BUT, I do not more a moment think he was anything other than overjoyed when Obama won. The night before the election at the rally in Hyannis, his excitement that he was not that he was beating Beatty, but an excitement for the potential of what an Obama Presidency could mean.

All I know is that at least from the glimpses shown to the public, he is a lot happier and satisfied with what his legacy in life than the last 2 Presidents are with theirs.

[TayTay]

39. It's not selfish

I think everyone in this group understands how you feel. We feel or felt it too. It did feel, and for you seems to still feel, like America had a missed moment and those moments don't come back. We learn to live with them, but that doesn't mean you forget the sense of loss.

The Senator felt it too. You don't get over losing the Presidency by one state and a relative few thousand votes and just go to sleep and pretend it didn't happen. His sense of loss was profound. It was made worse by the immediate impulse of all these "friends" who suddenly deserted him and were only too happy to blame him for the loss in '04. I have said before that "victory has a thousand fathers while defeat is an orphan." That is triply true in the Democratic Party.

Politics is a blood-sport. It is a cruel way to make a living. If you read the recent profile of Sarah Palin in the new Vanity Fair, it seems that she doesn't mind playing this aspect of politics and is fairly cold and unfeeling toward people. She uses others to get what she wants and then abandons them. Cruel as this is, it is also insulating for her. The "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" are simply grist for the mill for that type of personality. She won't feel loss in the way you are talking about, in the way that says the country lost out. She might feel it as a personal thing, i.e., "I lost out."

The good Senator from MA no doubt felt this as a personal loss. After all, it was his name all over those posters and his personal life and reputation that were the dead-center target for the media and the opposition. It was personal. (How could it not, at least partially, be otherwise?) But the loss was also national. He said that he really, really felt this loss in 2005 when he traveled to the Middle East and consulted with leaders there who were not getting any support from Bush. Kerry could not help them; he had lost and had to return to a Senate and Congress that were still controlled by the other Party. It was personal loss and it was a sense of profound loss for the country. It was very sad. (This is about the time we all started to get together on this board.)

I cannot tell you not to feel what you so obviously do feel. That is beyond my ability. It is also not something I would ever wish to do. You feel what you feel. I understand. I feel it too, but perhaps not to the degree you currently do.

Fame is a very fleeting thing. President Lyndon B Johnson oversaw one of the greatest expansions of social programs for the poor in our nation's history. Yet he will always be known for his failures in Vietnam. Harry Truman was relegated to the trash heap of history at the time he left office. Truman had the lowest approval ratings for any President in office, until GW Bush. Yet Truman has been resurrected by historians as a great President because he backed things like the Marshall Plan even when it was very unpopular with the voters.

I do not know how history will rate Sen. Kerry or where he will appear in it's pages. But I do know that he had a hand in helping to change our foreign policy at a time when it needed to be changed. I do know that he helped end one war and brought pressure to bear to wind down another. I do know that he is working on getting climate change and energy legislation through the Congress. This is his mark on history. This is also greatness, whether it is seen or not by the pundits. It is the worthy work of a good man who is in his time and element right now. The country and the world will be a better place because he is doing this work and I can ask no more of someone than that. This is not consolation for what you have said, but it is something to think about.

[karynnj]

40. Thanks for saying this so beautifully and well

Your comments contrasting Kerry and Palin are insightful - and there are some on our side closer to Palin in those characteristics. The sad thing is that politics seems easier for those with less admirable personalities.

[wisteria]

42. I appreciate your thoughts. And, I am excited to think he is in a position to help assist

in much needed world wide changes. I for one will always make sure the people I come in contact with know his part in all of this and I suppose I can only hope that others do not get the credit entirely for his efforts.

[YvonneCa]

41. Many of us here share your feelings about...

...how Senator Kerry has been treated. It has been VERY unfair, IMO.

He once said that the war in Iraq would be viewed by historians as one of the largest foreign policy misadventures of all time (paraphrasing). That was back in 2005 when he was busy speaking out to turn the country around. I believe those same historians...when the time comes to review every document, speech, action and effort to put this country on a better course...will finally understand his role and give him his due. It may be far off into the future, and we older DUJK'ers may not last to see it :7, but I just can't imagine that the things we all have watched him do to influence the changes our country needed to make can be ignored.

From legislation on climate change, to fixing health care/the economy, to getting the Middle East right, to regaining the respect and our leadership role in the world...Senator Kerry has been at the forefront on it all. Between Kerry, Biden, Gore and Obama...our country has the leadership we have lacked for eight years.

One day, when the time is right, someone will be brave enough to tell tha story. JMHO. ;)

[karynnj]

35. It makes a difference to me as well, but I do see the plus and minuses that

Beachmom mentioned. i do agree with what she says and hope that is story will interest a good future historian.

When Bush was President, the most regret and emotion he showed when he spoke of losing, was always in the context of what he could do. Now, he has a President, who for the most part he agrees with, who is doing many things that Kerry wanted done. He, himself, seems incredibly busy. It also seems nice that Teresa has gone on many of his trips this year.

I do hope, that like Kennedy, he will get the credit he deserves at some point. But, even if he never gets more credit then he gets now, he knows the good he has done, i don't think he has to unnoticed - anymore than McCain is. He is more than a nondescript Senator.