Ellen Goodman is on my shitlist.

[saltpoint]

I did NOT care for that column, which called for Kerry to refrain from another run at the White House. I have respected her for many years and this column was just a jolt.

I just sent Ms. Goodman a strongly-worded email letter, suggesting that her column was utter crap. I asked her to consider that voters in all 50 states decide via caucuses and primaries who the nominee is, not snotty, dismissive columnists.

I further suggested that her column was "a stinking betrayal of principle" rarely seen in American newspapers. I asked her if she was in line to fill Tony Snow's old job at FOX.

Etc. I'm completely surprised and feel ambushed.

If anybody wishes to share a reaction to her Kerry-bashing in that column, Ms. Goodman's email is:

[e-mail]

[kerrygoddess]

1. You go Old Crusoe!

I'm catching up on my day and plan to send her one too.

[saltpoint]

2. I just couldn't believe my eyes.

How ya doin', and Happy Friday.

[JI7]

3. not surprising coming from the Globe

which is often Kerry bashing.

my problem with it is more of her dismissing anything Kerry does because they don't want to get credit and possibly help him if he does run in the Primary again. one doesn't need tos upport him in the primary in order to support what he is doing now.

[saltpoint]

4. True. It seemed awfully small-minded of Ellen Goodman.

Kerry's record on women's rights has been extraordinary, and that's one of Goodman's all-time high-priority issues.

[TayTay]

5. Ellen is for Hillary

That's who she wants, that's who she will shill for.

Grass is always greener....

[ProSense]

6. You can't be serious!

A vision for security in the post 9/11 world? Ellen is smoking.

[TayTay]

7. Ellen is for Hillary

She wants a woman to run. It is the logical conclusion to all her columns. She is disparaging Kerry because she wants Hillary. She always has.

There are a number of female columnists who want Hillary. Period. End of discussion. They appear at fund-raisers in Boston and other major cities for Hillary. That's who they want.

At least now it's out in the open. Goodman is a personality voter. She wants a woman, and that woman is Hillary. All her Boston friends are doing the same. So, it looks like we may have lost the 'influential Boston 'Ladies who Lunch' crowd for the nonce. It's also early. We shall see.

You were expecting, ahm, what?

[ProSense]

8. Then I guess

Ellen is really is full of it becuase her whole argument is the need for vision. She could have at least tried to argue using one of Hillary's strong points.

[TayTay]

9. It is prepatory to that

She can't come out yet and say who she is for. She can only say who she is against.

There will be a lot more like this.

Yawn

[wisteria]

10. I really was off on this one. I don't see Senator Clinton in any of the

descriptive references she made. Well, Goodman is going to have a rude awakening when she realizes that being a woman voter doesn't necessarily mean that vote is going to Clinton. There is such a push for Clinton, I wonder if people aren't getting sick of it- I know I am. We could possibly see a backlash against her simply because she is being shoved at us.
There was a nifty poll done by CNN that Wolfie announced and I was forced to suffer through on Hillary's use of her maiden name and how that may get her more votes down South.

Anyway, back to Goodman, I feel she stepped over a line with that piece she wrote. That was an out and out attack on JK using right wing and freeper talking points. Who exactly does she think she is and why should JK care about her shrill opinion of a second run.

[karynnj]

11. The saving grace is her singular lack of timing

The anti-Kerry comments here seem to resolve around 3 issues:
1) He was a bad campaigner last time - this will be a MSM complaint that Kerry will get - but it won't explain why he did as well as he did. It will be used though. That 2008 is likely to be a much easier year than 2004 should be considered.
2) He has no ideas, only policies. Kerry can easily counter this because:
--vague ideas, without policies are not implementable, otherwise we could elect any random former Miss America candidate (now old enough) who said she was for world peace.
--He is the only one of the potential candidates who has expressed his world view on foreign policy rather than just immediate goals. His Iraq plans have a level of thought and completeness that none of the others do - and they do show consistent values from plan to plan
--His domestic solutions respect small business, while caring for the needs of people. The alternative fuels/jobs/environment connection of 2004 is just as valid now as then (watch for others to use it.)
--His sound bite that briefly summarized his goals tested the highest - so apparently people don't think he has no ideas.

The timing is bad as many people reading her will have read Bob Herbert who is also syndicated. It is clear and obvious from Herbert's column that Kerry is leading a charge on a set of issues from dissent, constitutional rights, American historical values and, last but not least, changing the course in Iraq. (A pretty big set of ideas, if you ask me.) Hillary has been pretty silent (except for her plantation comment ) on all these. Hillary has really not expressed any concepts, ideas or philosophy as it relates to policy. (Neither did Bill through much of his presidency). So, Kerry IS currently doing exactly what Goodman is saying he isn't.

[TayTay]

12. The 'Ladies Who Lunch' want someone else

Yawn. There is an established power center. Long-time columnists are in with that clique of people. Is it really a wonder that Goodman would want someone 'like her' and who campaigns in a way that she thinks highly conventional pols should campaign.

She is drawing the wrong conclusions from the last war and is preparing the wrong battle plan.

[karynnj]

13. It also seems poor strategy to write this

If her real concern was Kerry, wouldn't see be better off spotlighting someone she thought could be the "anti-Hillary" but who would lose to her in the final battle. Especially if she praised them in a way that didn't suggest they were well qualified to be President.

For example, she could write about Feingold's heroic and lonely (though it really isn't) battle on censure and the Patriot Act. (raising his chances to be the anti-Hillary, but she could later say he's unelectable.) Or, she could write about Edwards' laudable New Orleans work - but later say his resume is slim.

Begging Kerry not to win - saying he has no ideas and is a bad campaigner - is just lame.

[wisteria]

14. That is my feeling also.

Sometimes I get the impression that Senator Clinton is going to run on President Clinton's record. There was some discussion on CNN yesterday about a possible nostalgia vote in favor of Clinton. Like you, I haven't seen any leadership qualities emerge as of yet. When I hear her speak ...well let's just say, I am far from impressed with the tone as well as the content. I wonder if she is being advised to run similar to her husband. One problem I see with this choice is she does not have President Clinton's personality to pull it off.

[jenndar]

15. You should send those points to her!

You make a really good argument.

[karynnj]

18. I am trying to write something today

Combining this:

In the week of a landmark speech, rather than complimenting her Senator for saying what needs to be said on both dissent and Iraq, she begs him not to run. Senator Kerry has said he will make up his mind later this year. Why not comment on the speech - and realize that Kerry is leading on Iraq and the repression of dissent, serious important issues NOW, not in 2008? Why not comment on the climate that has made dissent hard - that she as a journalist can impact?

This one is essentially asking Kerry to realize that even if he can convince people to vote for him -he shouldn't run because he's not the right person and has no ideas.

with some of post 11 - on Kerry's ideas.

[karynnj]

30. Here's the letter I sent to the BG (which I doubt they'll print)

In the week of a landmark speech, rather than complimenting her Senator for saying what needs to be said on both dissent and Iraq, Ellen Goodman begs him not to run. Senator Kerry has said he will make up his mind later this year. Why not comment on the speech - and realize that Kerry is leading on Iraq and the repression of dissent, serious important issues NOW, not in 2008? Why not comment on the climate that has made dissent hard - that she as a journalist can impact?

She claims that Kerry doesn't have ideas, only policies. But vague ideas, without policies are not implementable, otherwise we could elect any random former Miss America candidate (now old enough) who said she was for world peace. In my opinion, Kerry has expressed thoughtful ideas on more issues than any of the potential 2008 candidates.

His plans to change the course in Iraq are more detailed, thought out and well constructed than any one else's. His speech on how to deal with terrorism given in Ulster provides an equally idealist alternative to the neo-con plans. His linking of developing alternative fuels to creating jobs to improving the economy, and his various programs to help small businesses which create the manuy new jobs are very creative ideas to help the economy. His health plan in 2004 was praised by many independent groups. All these plans are driven by ideas.

The other complaint was that he was a bad campaigner. If this is true, he won't win the nomination, so Goodman should have no worries. That she is writing an op-ed nearly 2 years before the election indicates she is worried he can win, possibly because she saw how strong his speech at Faneuil Hall was.

[ProSense]

33. Wonderful! n/t

[karynnj]

35. Thanks!

[saltpoint]

34. Hell of a good letter, karynnj. I hope the GLOBE prints it.

The Kerry-Edwards tickets got more votes than any other Democratic ticket in the history of the country.

And Goodman wants him not to run.

[karynnj]

36. Thanks

I hope they get enough letters that they think about it - I doubt mine will be selected as it is too long.

[ProSense]

17. I agree with

Jenndar. These are excellent points and you should send them to Goodman.

[politicasista]

21. Unfortunately the South...

is where most of the AA votes are. That's Bill's turf (e.g. Arkanasas) The Clintons know who, what, and where their base is, so that's probably why Wolfie was gloating over Hillary getting more votes in the South. A lot of people say they wouldn't mind seeing Bill back in the WH, so they wouldn't mind seeing her run.

[ProSense]

22. Both Gore and Kerry did better than Clinton

Kerry won 94% and Clinton got 90% (Gore got only 40%) in Arkansas.

From a previous post, Kerry won 91% of the African American vote in TN, which was 2% higher than the national. He got the same in AL, 90% in MO, MS and LA and 88% in GA.

Both Kerry and Gore got more of the African American vote than Clinton (Gore 6% more and Kerry 4% more), and that Kerry increased his margin by 2.5 million more votes than Gore.


Gore got 90% overall to Clinton's 84% (2nd term results). Kerry got 88%.

[wisteria]

32. Thanks for pointing these numbers out, I wish there was some sure

way of knowing if Kerry's numbers would hold if he was running against H. Clinton. I suspect they would, but then there is that Bill factor to consider- the numbers are close. But Senator Clinton is not President Clinton's political twin, so I wouldn't just assume the AA vote will automatically go to Senator Clinton.

[wisteria]

31. It will have to be stressed constantly that it is not Bill who is running

it is Hillary Clinton and she is not Bill Clinton. I realize President Clinton is popular, but does all that popularity actually extend to Hillary? What has she done on her own for the AA community. Does she think she can run on President Clinton's record?

[politicasista]

39. Good question.

I haven't been up to speed on what she has done for the AA community, but she has always been an admired person within the community.

[jenndar]

16. Oh, good.

I mean, who's more committed to equal rights than the Ladies who Lunch?

:eyes:

[saltpoint]

20. I figured there'd be an affinity there for Sen. Clinton, but this is

really an out-of-the-blue dismissal of Kerry.

Well. Anybody who has a brief moment today, maybe send Ellen Goodman a quick email and give her your thoughts.

[wisteria]

19. I waited a day to calm down and I just finished and sent her a response.

She really needs to she the JK support. She may decide to be a little more fair next time she writes about Kerry.

[ProSense]

23. Here's my response to Goodman

Ms. Goodman,

You should be ashamed for having written an extremely disingenuous opinion piece, “Don't run, John Kerry,” suggesting that Senator John Kerry not seek the Democratic Party nomination in 2008. Your opinion that the Democratic candidate for president in 2004 had no vision is an insult to the 59 million people, including me, who voted for him. I am deeply offended by your charge.

In your claim that vision for security in the post 9/11 world is what is needed, you seemed to have overlooked two major speeches by Senator Kerry:


Real Security in the Post 9/11 World

http://www.kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=249580


John Kerry: “Security in a Dangerous World”

John Kerry is in Northern Ireland today to deliver a keynote lecture at the University of Ulster. Kerry’s speech is part of the Tip O’Neill series of peace lectures at the University.

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2133


In addition, let me point to an interesting comment about the 2004 campaign:

Howard Wolfson, a past communications adviser to Sens. Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer, both New York Democrats, said the media no longer has "gatekeepers" like former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite to set standards for what passes for news.

As a result, the media can get pulled into covering stories of questionable worth, like the claims by the Swift Boat Veterans group that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry wasn't really a war hero. "We got shafted," said Wolfson, who predicted Democrats would employ similar tactics in future presidential contests.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060426/NEWS02/604260307/1007/NEWS02&theme=


I couldn't help but equate this statement with your vitriolic opinion. I suppose as a columnist you don't assume a role as a "gatekeeper," but do you have any allegiance to the facts?

The Democratic Party does not advocate serving up fictitious and poisonous words that only serve to sustain bitter, nasty people (http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006861.php) in their obvious malcontent.

I also find it curious that you launched your attack on Senator Kerry only a few after he delivered a defining speech on American’s right to dissent. You can read the speech here:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2006_04_22.html


Here is a review:

35 Years Later, By Bob Herbert, The New York Times, Monday 24 April 2006

Presidents and politicians may worry about losing face, or losing votes, or losing their legacy; it is time to think about young Americans and innocent civilians who are losing their lives.

- John Kerry on Iraq

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042506O.shtml


Also, may I remind you that we live in a democracy and Kerry has every right to run for office. I will vote for him in again in a heartbeat.

Promoting a state of constant fear and building up straw men to teardown are tactics for grossly self-involved people. American democracy needs to be saved from demagoguery, whether it comes from the right or the left.

[saltpoint]

24. Con brio! Nice, nice job. I hope her office is flooded with letters.

[ProSense]

28. Thanks!

I hope she gets a lot of criticism for this.

[karynnj]

27. Great letter

[ProSense]

29. Thanks! n/t

[ray of light]

37. You have tremendous writing talent Prosense.

Great letter as always!

[karynnj]

38. I re-wrote mine to send to her because I think you're right

She needs to get a lot of mail. I put a different link to the Ireland speech from the thread months ago. She really needs to listen to it and getting at least 2 links that are different may make the letters seem more independent.

I remember an editorial in fall 2004 in the NYT, that spoke of how in the past the liberals were the ones who laid claim to idealism where the conservatives were the pragmatists. It went to say that Bush's actions in the ME were based on the idea that democracy was good and everyone should have it, where Kerry was more of a realist. This speech is important because Kerry succeeds in articulating on optimistic, inspiring view of how the world can deal with the current problems while respecting other cultures. I assume, like all Kerry speeches, he will continue to rework themes in this.

I've heard a speech on roughly the same topic by Biden - it was convoluted, contradicted itself and did not seem to be based on a consistent world view, which Kerry's did. I have never heard this type of intellectual speech on anything from Hillary or any of the other candidates.

Anyway, I wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the week of a landmark speech, rather than complimenting your Senator, who you voted for 6 times, for saying what needs to be said on both dissent and Iraq, you beg him not to run. Senator Kerry has said he will make up his mind later this year. Why not comment on the speech - and realize that Kerry is leading on Iraq and the repression of dissent, serious important issues NOW, not in 2008? Why not comment on the climate that has made dissent hard - that you as a journalist can impact?

You claim that Kerry doesn't have ideas, only policies. But vague ideas, without policies are not implementable, otherwise we could elect any random former Miss America candidate (now old enough) who said she was for world peace. In my opinion, Kerry has expressed thoughtful ideas on more issues than any of the potential 2008 candidates.

His plans to change the course in Iraq are more detailed, thought out and well constructed than any one else's. His speech on how to deal with terrorism given in Ulster provides an equally idealist alternative to the neo-con plans. (This speech is important as the neo-con views have been presented as the idealist, spreading democracy path, ignoring that they do it at the point of a gun and never in history has that worked. Here's a link to the speech: http://www.ulster.ac.uk/news/john-kerry-speech.pdf
His linking of developing alternative fuels to creating jobs to improving the economy, and his various programs to help small businesses which create the many new jobs are very creative ideas to help the economy. His health plan in 2004 was praised by many independent groups. All these plans are driven by ideas.

The other complaint was that he was a bad campaigner. If this is true, he won't win the nomination, so you should have no worries. That you are writing an op-ed nearly 2 years before the election indicates you are worried he can win, possibly because you realize how comelling and strong his speech at Faneuil Hall was. You should also consider that 2004 may be a much easier election for any Democrat to win. In 2004, many people still believed that invading Iraq was necessary, that Bush was a strong President who could and would protect us and the media did a very poor job in reporting much Kerry said from the campaign trail. Watching the electrifying rallies on CSPAN then reading the media was strange. In 1992, in October the broadcast media showed the ever intensifying Clinton rallies. In 2004, Kerry broke records on crowd size and the media hid it as much as possible.

[ray of light]

25. please tell me who Ellen Goodman is.

Is she popular?

[karynnj]

26. She's been a columnist for years

I actually have liked some of her columns, but my local paper that once carried her seems to have dropped her. (I didn't even catch that she was gone - something I'd notice within a week if Krugman or Herbert disappeared from my NYT.)

[saltpoint]

40. It's been a couple days now, and I've cooled down some, but remain

disappointed.

The argument that Kerry has to be crucified after receiving the record total for a Democratic candidate in U.S. history is completely unpersuasive. I loved our ticket in 04, arguably the best of my lifetime.

Not to mention I don't buy the Ohio results.

But. The black smoke is no longer roiling out of my ears and I've regained the will to live. Just the same, Kerry is owed a lot of respect; when the media generally backhand him, as they did Gore, it's almost expected despite being unacceptable. When a progressive does it, it's just hard to take.

[karynnj]

41. I've cooled dow a little bit

and realyze that it is fear that he could mount a strong campaign that motivates some of his critics. They are attempting to keep public perception from swinging towards Kerry. In some cases, they are re-enforcing RW smears of 2004 and in other cases making up new ones.

But, as Tay and others have said, the election has been over a long time and if Kerry were as weak a candidate as they say, he would not even be mentioned. In April 1998, were there article on why Dole ran a poor race? Using Goldwater references? Dole was making Viagra and truely disgusting Pepsi commercials (oggling a teenager) at that time, but the media was rehabilitating his reputation into that of an elder statesman.

That, at a comparable time, they are ignoring all Kerry's work in the Senate, all his work for the party, and worse his work for the country. Kerry's foreign policy work has been excellent. The liberal press should have backed his early 2005 question of why we were accepting Jordan's, Eqypt's, France's and Germany's offer to train Iraqis. The liberal press should have pushed elements (or all) of his October 2005 Iraq plan, even just getting us out of search & destroy and spelling out we don't want permanent bases would have had an impact. The question I have is whether many elite liberals have sold out knowing our standard of living depends on cheap oil and they tacitly agree with the neo-con/neo-liberal ideas.

Joe Klein has essentially said that 911 pushed him to back Bush. It's clear his obnoxious Abu Ghaib comments were to position McCain, even though he didn't speak out and Kerry did. My reaction to that comment was emotional because he was accusing Kerry of ignoring torture and implying that he had abandoned the values he had for his entire adult life. The fact was Kerry answered that beautifully and not defensively, because the charge is easily defused as not true. (That it was Klein himself didn't hold Bush and the Republicans who could have changed things responsible is telling. He also is smart enough to know that 2004 couldn't have been won by making it a referendum on war crimes, even if the media would have repeated Kerry's message.

Ellen Goodman was easier. She concedes that Kerry is a good man, but doesn't want him to run because ... when you boil it down, she simply doesn't want him to run. (that he's a bad campaigner makes no sense - because then he won't win. The no ideas thing is weird as he clearly does. What it may say is that ideas to her meaning something like a Marketing theme or slogan.)

[saltpoint]

42. Very thoughtful observations, karynnj. Appropriate association

there with Klein. In several interviews, he comes across as a complex guy, although it's not easy to follow the trail he leaves. He's usually exasperating. Oh well.

It's true that Goodman did not slam Kerry, as often happens on DU and other blogs. There's a perception, totally baseless, that Kerry is too conservative -- an establishmentarian. I think that's true only so far as he's in the institution of government, but his thinking itself has always been innovative and challenging to the status quo. He's quite liberal, and that Kerry-Edwards ticket was a peach if you ask me. Nixon was frightened of Kerry early on, and properly so.

I think the GLOBE is unenthusiastic about Kerry because Kerry IS innovative and challenging. He doesn't quite fit the mold for them, and they are often harder on him than on others.

I accept that Ellen Goodman wants Sen. Clinton to be president. In my blood and bones, though, I do not believe HClinton will be the nominee. My loyalties aside, I just don't see the jostling in the early primaries coming out in her favor.