This thread makes me sad, especially right now..:(

[ObamaKerryDem]

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1635716

Some critical comments in the replies yes but I agree with the OP.

[karynnj]

1. Me too -

But, I am also a little annoyed by the fact that like the similar Gore and Hillary threads, it is at Obama's expense.

I politely attacked one of the Clinton threads, for that reason - so I am avoiding the Kerry thread not to be hypocritical. However, it seems fair to ponder it in the John Kerry group.

I also think they ignore that Kerry would have faced two Houses controlled by the Republicans, the same two wars, Katrina (which he would have handled better, but which would still have been awful, and the economic collapse might have been mitigated a bit, but it still would have been devastating. There is NO WAY he would have been re-elected.

What might be more interesting would be what if Kerry, with his deep knowledge of the Senate and his real depth in both Finance and Foreign Policy issues, and most importantly his incredible diplomatic skills, would have not had the "joke", stayed in, and showed why he should be elected in the primary debates - and won the nomination.

Part of why the Clinton people wanted him out was he was a threat in many ways. He was perfectly positioned on the issues for a primary. Even versus Obama, there was the fact that Kerry was leading on getting out of Iraq. He also was right on filibustering ALito - when HRC and Obama watched from the sidelines saying it wouldn't work. In addition, HRC's claim was she was the one with experience. Standing between Obama and Edwards, that is true. Now, mentally add Kerry. He has the gravitas and the depth that exceeds hers - and his patience and grace beats her brittleness any day.

Now, imagine that Kerry. The Kerry described well in the recent NYT article, patiently listening to all sides and using his skill at finding the way past problems. Could he have done better in 2009 and 2010 - maybe enough to have prevented the loss of the House. I remember a town hall Kerry did in Somerville on HCR. Just as was noted by Pakistanis quoted in the NYT article, Kerry had a genuine humility then, respectfully answering all the questions asked and getting the crowd to listen to a tea party question that he then answered. I think a President Kerry would have done better keeping MA in 2010.

If you think about it, the very skills Kerry has shown as a diplomat are what is used negotiating with the Republicans - and we saw him work with them on START.

[YvonneCa]

2. This is OT but totally ON TOPIC...

...with what you both are saying. That thread saddened me, too. And, karynnj, I agree with you about the skills JK would bring to the Presidency. It's hard to say ...exactly...how those skills would have impacted events since 2004. But I fully believe they were needed earlier than 2008 when Obama was elected. (And it is never my intent to disrespect President Obama. I think he is to be honored for what he agreed to take on in 2008.)

This is a link to Al Gore on Countdown today, talking about our broken government. THAT is the problem, IMHO. And I still believe that our President, Al Gore, Senator Kerry are very involved in trying to put our country on the right track. I'd be interested what you all think about what the former VP had to say. and the Special Comment (it's pretty far out there...) :)


http://current.com/shows/countdown/

[karynnj]

3. I liked the segment with Al Gore

The two things that he addressed well are the amount of money in politics and the media. I think he is on the mark that these are two of the drivers for the current dysfunctional Congress. Note that they are both factors outside of Congress itself. I think he is right on here - as these problems are what elected these reactionaries and encouraged them in their unwillingness to compromise.

On the money in politics, it is good to see that Gore is now speaking like the small remnant of mostly liberals spoke of it - and tried to legislate it. His comments are in keeping with things people like Kerry and Wellstone spoke of more than a decade ago. In fact, where Gore is speaking of the corporate money (Citizen's United, they were speaking against money driving things when the offense was less obviously wrong.

On the media, his example of the media role in inaccurately framing the question on both Iraq and on what the current economic problem is. (On the latter, I was surprised to read on Daily Kos, that the % of current income needed to pay the interest on the debt is actually lower than it was in the 1970s and 1980s - due to low interest rates. Here, we are moving away from taking advantage of that. The money we were using to stimulate the economy is relatively cheap - and we looked poised to having a good return on it if it did cause the economy to rebound.) The problem, as Gore said, is a lackluster economy and high unemployment.He then suggests that having misinformation in their frame of the issue, they can't find the right answers.

He then speaks of the barriers in the traditional media - you need money. He contrasts this to everyone being able to print pamphlets in Revolutionary times and then mentions that the internet breaks down those barriers.

Here, I am less optimistic than he was here. I agree that the internet does give more people voices. However, even when a voice succeeds because of quality or interest etc, it takes many small voices to come close to reaching as many people as one BIG mass media voice. In addition, I think the internet has led to people hearing only their own side - with many becoming progressively more radical and getting validation from their virtual peers for doing so. I think we might have been better off when there were respected voices from across the political spectrum actually reporting news. But, I really do not see a way to get back there. The best days of professional journalism, with the news hours being a cost, not a revenue, source for networks (themselves nearly obsolete) are over. Newspapers and real News are not what they were even a decade ago.

I do credit Gore for trying to do, with Current, what some have always asked why wealthy people on our side didn't do - which is to have a TV network that is on our side. It will be interesting to see if he can develop a good enough set of programs to get enough people to work to get the channel on their cable systems. Right now, it is way too small to stand against the media empire of a RW Australian, who has been shown to have no scruples.

That said, Gore looked healthier than he has in years and he seems to have found a place and a mission where he seems very comfortable.

[YvonneCa]

4. Thanks for your thoughtful response...

...karynnj. Much of what Al Gore said is the reason I am such a fan of his book, Assault on Reason.

I agree with a lot that you've said. I have been giving a lot of thought to this issue recently, and really appreciate your opinion. I will respond a little more 'in depth' later. (I'm off to radiation therapy in a few minutes! :) ) Next week is my last one... Yaaaay! :hi:

[JI7]

5. the poster was pretty nasty to Kerry after he endorsed Obama

he did support Kerry in 2004. but i remember how nasty he was . and i think the purpose of these threads is more to bash Obama than anything else.

i always think we would not be in a mess this bad if Kerry had been president, and even less so if Gore had been president as it would have been less years for Bush to make a mess.even if Gore had just gotten 4 years with 4 years of Bush or another republican before Obama, we would be in a better position.

many of the people bashing Obama are the same ones who did Gore and KErry and other Dems every election. but than you have those who are bitter over the 2008 primary still like that OP.

the thing with Kerry is he has been in the Senate with many of the people for so long that he might have had an advantage in how to get certain ones to agree to a deal. there would also be the lack of Tea Party which mostly exists because their anger at Obama because he is Black.

but Kerry owuld have had some negatives like people thinking he is too liberal already which republicans would have exploited .

overall though Kerry would have been a great President . many of the things he talked about in his campaign are things that would ahve helped prevent the mess we are in . created jobs.

i just can't believe after the 8 Bush years people are still trying to push he no difference, all the same lies. well, i can in some cases as i think they have an agenda .

[wisteria]

6. Thanks for the information. n/t