Kerry Prepares Another White House Run

[CatWoman]

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has maintained a decidedly low profile following his self-described botched joke in the run-up to the 2006 midterm elections. Many observers concluded that Kerry's silence meant he had given up his dream of becoming the first Democrat since Adlai Stevenson to be renominated by his party four years after losing a presidential race.


Wrong. Kerry has recently begun to bolster his Senate and campaign staff in preparation for what some Kerry insiders insist is a likely run for president. Kerry has signed on Erik Smith to serve as a senior adviser to his Senate campaign committee and Vince Morris to be communications director in his Senate office.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/01/kerry_gets_ready.html

[Ninja Jordan]

1. Ugh, stay out.

[Mz Pip]

3. I agree

Been there, done that. Don't want to do it again.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Monkeyman]

11. You and me both Veterans For Kerry IL

Stay out John

[politicasista]

21. Yes, let's tell a candidate that cares about veterans to stay out

As a matter of fact, let's tell Edwards, Vilsack, Kusinich, Sharpton and all the others that are thinking about running to stay out. It is a nice way to promote them don't you think?

[blm]

67. Why would you want an anti-corruption, open government Democrat to stay out of the debate

of the issues for the Democratic party?

[zulchzulu]

175. Yeah, veterans like Kerry should stay out of the race be...cuzzz.....

...we need peeps that don't have a 30+ year record of supporting veterans in the White House... I mean... yunno... that just wouldn't make any sense...

People with that kind of record should be shunned, muzzled, Swiftboated and shown an utter lack of respect for their service and their activism over the years...I mean, why the fuck do we want qualified people running for President anyway?

This is America...the fact-challenged, knuckle-headed, short-term memory America. We want a biggie size burrito of stupidity with a little bit of unchallenged hype on the side. Buckle up, bandidto. We're in for trashing good people so that we can make up for the lack of a small member in our cheap polyester pants we bought at Walmart.

[sniffa]

13. ugh, see if you can post this in every kerry thread

[ProSense]

24. Run John, Run! n/t

[ProSense]

27. Sorry, this was supposed to be to the OP! n/t

[bigdarryl]

37. Once again the PUNDITS are wrong they were predicting he was Finished also..

Psychic Sylvia Brown predicted a year ago that McCain and Kerry would be the nominees for 08.And predicted Hillary wouldn't run.I don't believe shit these so called psychics say but could she be on to something. the fact that Kerry is close to saying it's a go is a total surprise to a lot of people. now watch when he announces he's in the race the media and the undits will be making fun of him saying he has NO chance of winning.

[Ninja Jordan]

74. Were hell to freeze over (and Kerry actually garner the nomination), he would lose badly to McCain.

[LittleClarkie]

79. Assuming McCain doesn't implode of course

I have my doubts, as I do with Hillary, that he can make it through the primaries. Conservatives hate the guy and see through his maneuvering.

[bigdarryl]

83. Kerry wins according to Silvia Brown and she's a McCain supporter....

according to her. but she sees Kerry as the next President

[blm]

89. You apparently haven't read McCain's book.

Heheh - the advertisements write themselves.

[babylonsister]

91. You've got to be kidding me. McCain's probably lost a majority of

his support because of his stance on this war. What are the percentage of Americans that oppose it? I doubt very much Kerry would lose 'badly to McCain'. :eyes:

[MADem]

159. McCain would have to totally flipflop on the war to align himself with most of America

He's against cutting/running, hugs the Monkey, slithers up to Falwell, and his wife had a stroke a while back and still isn't a hundred percent. He's too old. He looks even older when he's tired. I dunno....I think Kerry would be overjoyed at that matchup.

I say let anyone who wants to run, run. Let's not stop the debates before they even start.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jcrew2001]

151. Embezzelment

I agree, he should keep his 15 mill and leave us alone. I was already swindled by him once.

Does he need more money for the next 2 presidential elections, does he want us to buy swampland in florida?

I'll support the Dem nominee, but I want the person to put their money where his mouth is.

[LittleClarkie]

163. Did you donate to him in the primaries?

That was the money left over.

[jcrew2001]

217. left over

Ahhh, so you're saying he couldn't use the 15 million in the general election?

Way to go Kerry, I'm not giving you any more of my money you idiot. You somehow proved you were dumber than Dubya.

[MH1]

192. Get in, John Kerry!

Screw the naysayers.

We need the best man to run. That's John Kerry.

[hippiechick]

2. Oh. Yippie. NOT.

:eyes:

[sniffa]

15. i Love you

NOT

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ramapo]

4. ick

Just say no....once was more than enough

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[skooooo]

5. groooooaaan

:hide:

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TayTay]

6. Yeah!

Run John Run!

Let them all run and let the voters sort it out.

This is great news!

[wisteria]

14. You know I agree with you! n/t

[Botany]

7. I wonder if he is going to use his army of lawyers that were going to ..

..... make sure that the vote was fair.

John,

Your are a great man and a fine senator but when push came to shove you did
not have "my back" like you promised .... it is over for you being President.

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blue_In_AK]

8. This is a duplicate post...

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3048161&mesg_id=3048161

Maybe we can leave this one for the naysayers. :)

[AndyA]

9. You had your chance, John. And you lost.

OK, maybe you really won, and I did vote for you, but I won't vote for you again. I think you gave up too easily. You promised all votes would count, but you didn't give it enough time to make sure they did before you conceded.

I won't back a loser a second time. I want to WIN in 2008.

[JanusAscending]

18. So are you switching parties?

n/t

[AndyA]

58. Nope, right now I'm behind John Edwards.

Subject to change, but for now I like him best.

[karynnj]

111. If you only reason is that Kerry lost a close race to Bush

Edwards lost BADLY to Kerry in the primaries.

[AndyA]

180. That's not it. Edwards reminds me of John Kennedy.

He's handsome and successful, and has a great personality when interviewed. He has a great sense of humor, and he is able to laugh at himself. He's done a lot of good grassroots work the past few years. He is intelligent, speaks well, and is level headed.

The contrast with George Bush is obvious, and I think by the time the elections roll around in 2008, the American people are going to go as far away from someone like Bush as they possibly can. There's just too much dirt and dirty laundry to be aired in the next two years, and anyone that is reminiscent of Bush is doomed to fail.

At any rate, whoever the Dem candidate is, I will vote for them, even if I don't think they're the best one for the job. I would never vote GOP, and I know a vote for an Independent just dilutes things, so ultimately, that means if it's John Kerry, he will get my vote again. But he would not be my first choice, and I probably would not vote for him in a primary, but that depends on who the other candidate is.

Don't get me wrong, I like John Kerry. I think he's a smart guy, and I believe we'd be much, much better off today if he were in office. I just want to make sure we win this time, and I'm not sure rerunning a former candidate is the way to make that happen.

[karynnj]

112. If you only reason is that Kerry lost a close race to Bush

Edwards lost BADLY to Kerry in the primaries.

[jcrew2001]

147. bush

yeah, that was 4 years ago, we'll see how things play out - maybe with the 15 mill, kerry will build a time machine so he can travel back to 2004 and win the nomination again! and he can stay in 2004.

[zulchzulu]

25. Who are you supporting?

Mickey Mouse? The Hulk?

[AndyA]

57. John Edwards. n/m

Mickey Mouse is Disney, so he's a Republican.

The Hulk? Who knows, but I don't think he's running.

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iconoclastic cat]

10. Whoopdie f'ing doo. nt

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wisteria]

12. Woooooo Hoooooo! Good, I hope this report is true. He will add

experience,dedication and wisdom to the lineup.Oh, and excellent debating skills. I am happy he has not let the "joke smear" interfere with his plans.

[ClayZ]

73. You are right!

Thank you for saying so!

[Imagevision]

87. Kerry should just go back to work and take Joe biden with him...

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[peace13]

16. I already walked down that trail. n/t

[jgraz]

17. I'll believe it when I see it

I just can't accept that Kerry would be so deluded as to think another run would result in anything but total humiliation for him. 2004 was bad enough -- why would he want the final chapter of his presidential ambitions to be a last-place finish in Iowa?

[JanusAscending]

20. " Oh thee of little faith" !!!

n/t

[jgraz]

26. Yep -- zero faith

But lots of evidence. Kerry's done as a presidential candidate. We're just waiting for him to figure it out.

[ProSense]

28. "We're"

waiting for him to win!

Kerry 2008

[jgraz]

30. Good luck with that

I'm just hoping he doesn't distract too much from the real candidates.

[ProSense]

32. Good luck to the real candidates,

all of them.

Run John, Run!

Kerry 2008

[sniffa]

40. the reaL candidates

i Love that shit.

aLmost as dismissive as teLLing you to Leave whiLe the grown ups taLk.

[LittleClarkie]

78. What makes a real candidate

One who declares IS a real candidate.

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberal N proud]

19. Don't waste my time!

You had your shot, go home.

[ProSense]

22. How is Kerry running wasting your time?

Run John, Run!

Kerry 2008

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zulchzulu]

23. Support your candidate...I'll support mine

If you want to talk issues and back it up with facts, that's cool. If you want to whine like an illiterate monkey with Rovian talking points, get lost.

[jgraz]

39. It's posts like this that make many of us wish Kerry would just hang it up

I've seen posts critical of Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Kucinich, etc, etc, etc... Why is it that only Kerry criticism results in people being called "illiterate monkeys" and being accused of using "Rovian talking points"?

This crap, more than anything, has me rooting for a quick exit for Kerry in 2008.

[sniffa]

42. it's posts Like yours that make me wish you'd just hang it up

and i caLL BS.

start an anti-hiLLary thread, and watch the fLames erupt.

start one for edwards, and the same.

[jgraz]

47. There have been many anti-hillary and anti-Edwards threads

Show me one that resulted in the kind of vitriol that's thrown at Kerry detractors. All anyone has to do is put "Kerry" into the search engine and you find post after post that's been deleted by the mods due to personal attacks on anyone who doesn't worship at the Church of St. John.

[sniffa]

52. right off the bat

i started a thread Last week in response to hiLLary support thread (not reaLLy in earnest, but mocking the pretense of the orignaL thread) and the hiLLary avatars swarmed, and it wasn't too nice... aLthough the point of that OP was to see how hiLLary supporters Liked the reverse of the originaL thread ("hiLLary haters - teLL me one bLue state she can't win")

i no do no search

[ProSense]

55. So are you saying he's popular? Why are people so attracted?

Why all the energy? Kerry has a lot of support. Detractors (of any candidate) are not going to be decide the race, supporters will. That's why it's a race: to build support.

Kerry 2008

[jgraz]

59. No, I'm saying that the support for Kerry often goes far beyond rational debate

The impression left by the many attacks is that the Kerry support on this forum is more of a cult of personality than a reasoned political position.

[ProSense]

60. Maybe it's the attackers who are "a cult of personality than a reasoned political position."

Kerry 2008

[jgraz]

62. I propose both sides have a "who can be more reasonable" contest

It should make GD:P a much nicer place to hang out...

[zulchzulu]

68. Oh...you again....

Thanks for the reminder...the person who could be handed facts and choose to ignore...speaking of ignore....

[jgraz]

82. please do

We wouldn't want any reality to creep into your little bubble.

[Blaukraut]

29. incredible

And disturbing to see how many supposed Democrats here on DU are so willing to circumvent the democratic process and deny someone the right to run for president. I'm especially surprised at some of my fellow long time DUers who are falling into this pattern. We should know better, having come together BECAUSE of such a circumvention of said process!
Every person wanting to enter the primaries as a candidate should be afforded that right, no matter the circumstances, viability, electability, what have you.

[sniffa]

31. how true

yet fuck them!!

i'm so sick of this shit.

[jgraz]

33. Yes, because putting up a post on DU effectively prevents Kerry from running

(If only!)

Kerry can obviously do whatever he wants. But there's nothing wrong with expressing the wish that he stay out of the race this year and not divert money and attention from candidates who actually have a shot at the White House.

[Blaukraut]

36. then why not tell the following to stay out;

Sharpton, Kucinich, Vilsack, Dodd, and all other so-called third tiers who don't stand a chance and divert resources and attention? The attitude should be that we welcome anybody who add to the debate.

[jgraz]

45. Because I don't think Kerry has anything more to add to the debate

He had his say in 2004, and it didn't have the result we all hoped for. The fact that he was the nominee in the previous election will focus more attention on him than on the others. I'd much rather see stories on Kucinich's "hopeless" presidential bid than Kerry's. At least Kucinich (and to some extent Sharpton) are bringing some much-needed leftist fire to the debate.

Personally, I don't care what Vilsack and Dodd do, since they're likely going to be ignored by everyone. But I was overjoyed to see an empty suit like Evan Bayh drop out.

There's nothing wrong with pointing out the potential downside of a candidate choosing to run. Look what Pat Buchanan did to Bush 41's campaign. Kerry and Bayh are nowhere near as bad as that, but it shows that more candidates do not necessarily lead to a better result for the party.

[ProSense]

48. Sorry, Kerry will be one of the few people defining the debate,

always has always will.

Run John, Run.

Kerry 2008

[Blaukraut]

49. Your opinion only

Other people clearly believe that Kerry has a lot to add to the debate. So again, thankfully, it is not up to us to decide who enters the race, only who ultimately will win it. If we were to weed out all 'undesirables' before the primaries and heeded everybody's personal preference, there would be nobody left standing at the end.
So why don't you just relax, sit back, let the process take its course and work for your chosen candidate until you cast your primary vote?

[jgraz]

54. Of course it's my opinion

Did I ever say otherwise? But it's not only my opinion, as evidenced by the many "Please, God, No" responses on this thread.

[ProSense]

38. "Divert money"? How? From Kerry supporters?

What kind of rationale is that?


Run John, Run!

Kerry 2008

[jgraz]

41. Simple -- people who give money to Kerry's 2008 primary run

could use it to support another candidate, either in the primaries or the general. For someone who thinks Kerry has no chance, those donations look like wasted money.

[ProSense]

43. "Wasted money"?

There will only be one nominee, is everyone who supports a candidate other than the nominee wasting money?

People, including you, are free to support any candidate.

When I give money to a candidate I considerate it a good investment, despite what anyone else thinks.

Isn't that democracy?

I wouldn't presume to try to control where a person directs there contribution.

[jgraz]

50. You confuse "advocacy" with "control"

Obviously no one can "control" where you put your money. But Kerry has had his moment as the 2004 nominee, where he presumedly had the opportunity to express his vision for the country. Unless that message has substantially changed in the past 3 years, he really isn't adding anything to the primaries other than distraction.

[ProSense]

51. But I don't agree with you. I support Kerry. n/t

[jgraz]

56. Really? I hadn't noticed :)

Obviously if you think he's the best guy for the job, go ahead and support him. My only problem with this whole debate is the way that Kerry detractors are treated.

Reasonable people can decide for or against any candidate. Kerry's 2004 campaign certainly created strong opinions on both sides. I'd like to see both of those sides expressed without the debate degenerating as it has in the past.

[jcrew2001]

150. Kerry's 15 mill retirement fund

I'm not going to donate any more money to Kerry so he can stash it in his retirement fund. Maybe he needs another summer home on Nantucket or winter home in Aspen or private island or vineyard in france.

[sniffa]

44. you just soLved your own beef

don't donate to kerry.

[Blaukraut]

46. So you would like to tell people to whom they should donate?

Nice. Could it be possible that Kerry supporters don't WANT to give their money to a candidate not of their choosing? Ok, so you believe Kerry has no chance, and donations to him are wasted money? Fine. But it is still only the donor's business who gets his money and support.

[jgraz]

53. You do realize you're posting on a political advocacy forum, don't you?

Of course I'm telling people to whom they should donate! That's the whole point of having the debate! If someone said they were going to give money to Sam Brownback in 2008, would you have any problem telling them not to?

I simply don't understand how advocacy for or against a candidate can be viewed as somehow undemocratic. If you give money to Kerry 2008, I think you're throwing it away. And no one on a democratic forum should have any problem with me saying so.

[blm]

70. You should WANT your candidate to be able to BEST Kerry in the debates and

expect that they will present themselves as the best alternative because they crafted better policies and presented themselves as presidential material far better than Kerry.

Why would anyone want Kerry out if they know besting him would make the point for their candidacy?

[jgraz]

81. You're assuming Kerry's debate performances will be relevant

Once Kerry enters the race, the media is going to be filled with half-ridiculing stories about how hopeless his campaign is. His policies and debate performances aren't going to make one bit of difference. He'll be treated as yesterday's news from the moment he starts campaigning and his presence in the debates will only serve to take time away from more viable candidates.

Kerry isn't wholly responsible for this public image, but he does deserve some of the blame. And with that blame comes the responsibility to accept his current predicament and yield the floor to another candidate.

[blm]

88. So? They called his campaign dead for all of 2003, so who sez media should control ANYTHING

that ANY Dem should do?

The only people who should WANT Kerry out are the coverup Democrats who target the anti-corruption, open government Democrats for marginalization because they know that debating them exposes their weaknesses and the corpmedia will accommodate them - but, that doesn't mean our wing of the party should give in and roll over for that sort of treatment.

[karynnj]

125. yield the floor to another candidate?

This would make sense if just one candidate were allowed - but it's not a zero sum game. There are others with less chance getting more positive attention. (Biden and Richardson have NEVER to my knowledge polled as high - but people in the media are pushing both of them. What is Kerry taking from the rest of them.

[jgraz]

160. parse much?

I'll rephrase: he should give way to the candidates (plural) who have an actual chance at the nomination (and a win in the general). It ain't that hard to poll better than Biden or Richardson. How's he doing against Edwards and Obama?

And by the way, there IS just one candidate who's allowed to go on to the general election. There's no way that's going to be Kerry.

[zulchzulu]

85. I gave $25 to the Edwards campaign...

I must be crazy!!!!

[shawmut]

34. Good. The more the better.

:thumbsup:

[politicasista]

35. Exactly n/t

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jgraz]

158. Being right all the time can get annoying, I understand

You should try it once or twice...

[JNelson6563]

174. That's rich, coming from you who said

basically that anyone who's got criticisms of Kerry must have "originated" from FR. {i]That is a clear violation of DU rules, not refusing to march lockstep with Kerry supporters.

Juile

[sendero]

110. Bullshit..

.... the vitriol hurled against Kerry is directly proportional to the insanely positive spin put on ever single thing he does or says by a handful of posters here.

I think Kerry is a joke of a presidential candidate, and if you don't like it try to get me tombstoned. I have every right to my opinion and I support it as well as the rah-rah cheerleaders corp here does.

Kerry had his shot, he not only blew it but he folded like a paper napkin the very next day. All the CRAP about how he "didn't have proof" and other excuses are jsut that, excuses. Of course he didn't have "proof" the next day, and he didn't wait 2 days to get it either.

I don't trust anything about John Kerry other than his overweening desire to be president. And that is not enough, for him or for HRC.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

115. Is that what you were and still are doing? n/t

[sendero]

116. I don't think anyone here..

... will have any trouble figuring out to whom I was referring.

Oh, JK just saved the world, gotta go erase my old posts.

[ProSense]

118. Kerry 2008 n/t

[fedupinBushcountry]

120. Blather bullshit ?

:rofl:

All you are blathering is your opinion, where are your facts? Opinions are debateable, facts are facts.

[sendero]

171. Yes....

... and the bullshit blatherers will come up with 5,000 reasons why it was OK that Kerry...

1) couldn't win a race against a man who was literally a few weeks to polling less than 50%
2) walked away from numerous and obvious voter irregularities lest it mess up his 2008 chances
3) let himself be defined by some pernicious liars to the point you wonder if there wasn't some truth mixed in
4) just ran a lousy campaign full of faux pas worthy of a neophyte

And now, now that Bush and the Republicans have had 4 more years to do damage and discredit themselves to the point where just about any Dem should be able to win, NOW he wants another shot.

He'll get no support from me.

[wisteria]

121. Why sir, I resent your suggestion that because I support a candidate you don' t like that make me

something I am not actually.

[wisteria]

117. A handful? And proportional. You must be delusional. n/t

[jgraz]

161. Very well said

Sadly, this will have to be repeated again and again until Kerry drops out of the race. Let's hope it's soon for all our sakes.

[LittleClarkie]

165. Your sake, maybe, not mine

Leave me out of your "all" please. I support him.

[jgraz]

181. My statement has nothing to do with support or non-support of Kerry

It's a wish that the viciousness expressed toward fellow DUers would come to an end. The sad fact is that most of this nastiness is coming from Kerry supporters. Since he has no chance at the nomination from my point of view, he can't drop out soon enough. Hopefully that wll cut down on the pro-Kerry bulling that goes on here.

[LittleClarkie]

166. Nevertheless, one would think that one could post about a press conference

or somesuch without "I DON'T WANT HIM IN 2008!" coming up in a kneejerk fashion, even if 2008 is not the subject of the thread.

Thing is, the gang and I agree that we will post such things regardless of any plans he has for 2008. Even if he doesn't run. Even if he drops out after the first few primaries. Our support of him is not tied to his running in 2008. Hope you didn't think you'd be rid of us that easily.

We support him, regardless. We just happen to like the big lug.

[MH1]

193. "insanely positive spin"

well, I guess if you call promoting someone who is doing work that actually helps people, "insane", and you really don't care for any legislation that is about good government or other liberal values...

I guess that's why you may not want to hear about the work of a good Democrat, and may want to insult him every chance you get.

Myself, I don't see what is the point of calling oneself a "Democrat" if one doesn't want to promote people who work for Democratic values.

:shrug:

[MADem]

164. I agree with that assessment. It would seem that people should want to TOUT their

favorites, rather than tear down those of others. Meanspiritedness and snarky comments make it look as though the person is arguing from weakness, not strength. It makes it look as though they have nothing good to say about their own favorite, when in actual fact it's simply an inability to argue positively.

I look forward to hearing from EVERYONE, even Biden, Sharpton, and Kucinich, who aren't favored to win. Many voices add to the discussion, and make the platform stronger. And as long as Rev. Al is on the stage, the venue will CRACKLE!

[LittleClarkie]

63. I'm ready

[wisteria]

123. Very nice! n/t

[LittleClarkie]

149. It's on my back bumper even as we speak

I wonder if that site I got it from is still operational.

[Eurobabe]

64. Good luck n/t

[mloutre]

65. Run John Run, or Stop John Stop?

You know, until he ran for president in '04 I didn't really know much about John Kerry. Oh, I remembered him from the 1971 testimony; and like most people who were actually paying attention at the time, I remembered that he was one of the key players in breaking the BCCI-Iran-Contra corruption/collusion scandal. But other than that, he wasn't really on my radar during his 20-year career as a senator from a state I didn't happen to live in.

When John Kerry became the Democratic nominee in '04, though, I began volunteering and campaigning on his behalf. Why? In the beginning, it was definitely an ABB -- Anybody But Bush -- effort on my part. After all, I didn't really know much about the guy; but he was our guy instead of their guy, and that was good enough for me at the time.

But a funny thing happened during that campaign. I gradually came to know who John Kerry is, what he had done with his life, what he had done for his country, what his beliefs and principles are, and what kind of man he is in real life. In short, I learned enough about John Kerry to not only support him as an ABB candidate, but to genuinely respect and admire him.

And that respect and admiration continues to this day. I campaigned as hard as I could for John Kerry when he ran for president. I've continued to actively support him as a capable, experienced, and effective player on the national and world stages. I do believe that he is smart, wise, and honest -- all qualities that are far too hard to find in politicians these days.

If Senator Kerry chooses to run for president again -- and let's remember that it is his decision to make, not yours or mine, and that he hasn't made it yet -- then I will campaign as hard as I can for him again. If he chooses not to run, then I will continue to do everything I can to support his activities as a senator of significant stature who works on behalf all the people, not just those who live in Massachusetts.

You know, it's interesting to read the many comments here on DU from all the people who seem to have such virulent dislike of Senator Kerry. If he's as supposedly irrelevant as they claim, then why do they continue to waste so much energy fulminating against him? With a few key exceptions, the comments in this thread are direct indications of the problem that dogged him in '04, and that will continue to dog him in '08 should he choose to run:

It's a well-known adage that Americans don't trust anybody who is smarter than they are. They would rather vote for somebody like George Bush, with his faux folksy I'm-just-as-dumb-as-you-are style, no matter how untrustworthy and irresponsible he has proven himself and his cabal of retreaded neocons to be. He pretends to be just another average guy like us, and we-the-sheeple don't seem to realize what an unflattering comparison that is.

And there's the rub. P.T. Barnum said that nobody has ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. Unfortunately, many bodies have gone broke, and/or lost elections, by overestimating the intelligence of the American voter. John Kerry is wicked smart, as they say in Boston, and that intimidates the largely insecure and undereducated electorate.

(Some of the people commenting here on DU have claimed that John Kerry is aloof, arrogant, cold, calculating, self-centered -- but that is largely a sign of how insecure they feel about themselves by comparison. For example there is nobody, and I do mean nobody, in the potential race for the White House this time who is anywhere near as cold, calculating, arrogant, and selfish as Mrs. Clinton; yet she seems to have a cadre of defenders here even so. Does anybody accuse them of being paid to post nice things about her online? I think not. Why is that, you reckon? Hmm. I wonder.)

I do agree that if Senator Kerry chooses to run again it will be a bitter, bruising, uphill battle. I've had the pleasure of getting to know the Senator and his wife and some of their family members in person since '04, and I have to admit that I would not want to wish that kind of abuse on them (or anybody else, for that matter.) Many of the comments about JK on DU are indicative of what kind of vitriolic, knee-jerk attacks they can inevitably expect to receive if he chooses to run for president again.

That being said, if Senator Kerry does choose to run for president again in '08 again, then I will work my asterisk off to help him get elected. If he chooses not to do so, then I will work my asterisk off to help make sure he gets a well-deserved high-level position in whatever Democratic administration does win the presidency in '08. And mark my words, a Democratic administration will be in place in the White House in '08 -- and I'll be working my asterisk off to make sure that happens too, no matter who the nominee may turn out to be.

Thing is, I've come to know the real John Kerry. I believe in him and I trust him, both as a senator and as a man. I do believe that he would be an excellent president, and that if he had won the '04 election for that post -- which he lost by only 30,000 votes, hardly a momentous failure or a mandate for the Bushi'ites, and less than the statistical margin of error given the dubious voting irregularities in places like Ohio and Florida -- then this country would be a far better place today than it is now.

Will Kerry run again in '08? I don't know. That's up to him. Should he run again in '08? I don't know that either. As some of the comments in this thread have pointed out, even with the best of intentions it would be an uphill climb. (Of course, it was an uphill climb in '04 too, so it's rather premature to try to predict success or failure in that regard at this point.)

But if Kerry does run, then I am with him. And if he does not, then I am still with him. I know the man, and I know the politician, and I know that I can trust him. I know he's got my back, just as much as I've got his. And anybody that wants to say otherwise, well... that's their right -- but they're wrong.

[Cha]

66. Good! I just don't thinking

the fucking primaries need to get so bloody between our candidates who are basically on the same page.

If a candidate wants to continue the bloody massacre known as the War On Iraq then commence the blood letting.

[The Count]

69. Will he tell us what happened in the 2004 elecctions first? Like, who won?

It would be the prerequisite for both men on that ticket to even consider the possibility.

[zulchzulu]

75. Gee...let's ask John Conyers...

"Fighting for Every Voter"

A few more words about an issue that is of the utmost importance to me. As political candidates, we spend considerable time and effort every election cycle fighting for votes...

A few more words about an issue that is of the utmost importance to me.

As political candidates, we spend considerable time and effort every election cycle fighting for votes. After the election, whether won or lost, many candidates leave the irregularities of the election behind. But we owe the voters more than that. When voters are disenfrachised, we owe it to them to seek justice and expose the truth.

That is why I have been so proud of the Kerry-Edwards campaign's ongoing involvement in the investigation and litigation of what went wrong in Ohio. I wrote to the candidates recently to ask that they continue to be involved in this important endeavor.

This is not about the past. It is about figuring out what went wrong and why -- and then getting the next election right, not for the Democratic Party, but for all of the voters.

- John Conyers

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000213.htm

[Gregorian]

71. Let the sibling rivalry commence!

At first I thought it would be great to have one candidate. Build them up, and everyone get behind them.

Then I realized this is America. And I now believe the more the merrier.


Hell, what would a marathon be like with only one runner?

[liberalpragmatist]

72. I like John Kerry, but I think this is a bad idea

I'm not going to smear John Kerry. I think he ran a better race in '04 than people remember (he was running in a difficult climate - victory was achievable but was going to be tough) and I think he has served the country and his state very well for over twenty years. I still think he'd make a great president and were he to be the nominee again, I would vote for him without any qualms.

But I hope he doesn't run. He certainly has a right to, and if he chooses to I'll give him a good look, but there's just too much (unfortunate) hatred against him. His negatives are now higher than Hillary's. I'm sure that can come down, but I think it's just too soon after the '04 election and his '06 election eve "botched joke" non-story. Simply put, I worry that a 2nd Kerry run would just be an embarassment and would leave him without his Senate seat. And I'd prefer Senator Kerry to former Sen. Kerry. Yes, he could continue running for president and if he doesn't gain traction withdraw to his Senate race, but doing so would likely piss off the Massachusetts congressional delegation and many of his allies in Boston, who want him to choose one or the other so that the primary (likely to be competitive) can get underway.

So John, as a former supporter, I hope you know what you're doing. Your best position is remaining as senator for the time being.

[zulchzulu]

76. Support whoever you want...

As for Kerry running, I think it's a good idea.

[TayTay]

148. That is actually quite a nice thing to say.

It is one thing to have respect for someone and say that even though you think they have performed well as a public servant, you don't think they should go for higher political office because the obstacles facing them might be insurmountable. It is doubly nice to say that you would rather not lose them because they have been good at their jobs.

I also think Kerry is an excellent Senator and has done very good work in the Senate. However, if he wants to run again for President and this is what drives him, then he should run. There are excellent potential Senators in Massachusetts who could run for his seat. (We have a lot of bench-strength here.) It is a mistake for someone to try and be safe in everything because it can't be done. If running for President is what John Kerry wants to do, then he should do it.

There are people who are lying in wait to call everyone who runs for President and doesn't make it a loser. They think that the act of trying and failing will be the only thing that history will remember about them. If I were John Kerry, I would never let this thought trouble me. The only worthless people in this world are those who fail to ever risk anything because of fear. John Kerry has already done enough in his lifetime to earn a place in history. Should he run for President and not succeed, then other things in life will no doubt beckon. There is life beyond the Senate and after a Pres race. There is noble and good service rendered to the nation by those who never got elected President. Al Gore, for one, is rendering amazing service not only to this country, but to the world with his devotion to environmental causes. Only people with warped values would call Al Gore a loser because he was not inaugurated to the office he won. That is a very narrow and soulless definition of success.

Kerry should run because it might be in him to run again. I cannot think of anything worse in this life than thinking, "what might have been" and being afraid to find out. There is life beyond the Senate, there is service to be rendered if this doesn't pan out and there are others who could be Senators from Massachusetts, albeit different ones. I see no earth shattering wrong in Sen. Kerry trying this again. At least he will know and will not be confined by a false sense of safety into not doing what is in his heart to do. Have at it. Be not afraid. Life will go on no matter what. And the last cliche, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[Superman Returns]

77. good god, no

[PresidentObama]

187. Such an insightful response.

Care to explain the "good go, no" response?

[Imagevision]

80. Oh geeeez!! let him run already, it'll probably be good for Obama and Edwards - we need

new blood,,Youngblood! (like in the leon Russel tune)
"just give me some young-blood"

[against all enemies]

86. Great, a candidate that opens his mouth and makes people hate him.

And don't go calling me a puke because I stated a fact. I want a candidate that can win the general election, Kerry will just waste democratic time and money.

[PresidentObama]

90. Someone who opens his mouth and makes people hate him?

We're talking about John Kerry, not Bush ;-)

John Kerry's the really savvy one whose been a great fundraiser for the Democratic party, who stands up as one of the true leaders of our party, and who has been a fine Senator for the great state of MA!

[against all enemies]

92. Hate was a bad choice of a word.

But the more he talks the more people are turned off by him. He's been a good Senator but he's not the guy for 2008, sorry.

[PresidentObama]

93. Speak for yourself.

A lot of people said he wasn't the candidate in 2003, and in 2004 he was nominated and ran as our Presidential nominee.

I hardly count John Kerry out.

[sendero]

94. Kerry's been running..

.... since the day after the last election. This is hardly news.

[jcrew2001]

96. 15 million

Because he was saving his 15 million for 2008...hahaha - maybe he knew he had no chance in 2004.

If he grew some balls, he would be President.

[ProSense]

97. May I ask who you support?

I'd like to talk about the size of their tits and balls, or whether they have any. Please?

[PresidentObama]

100. LMAO!!!

ProSense, give me a Kerrycrat hug :yourock:

John Kerry has no balls?

Pssh, give me a break!!

GEEZ-US CHRIST!! Tell me we AREN'T going to go there?!?

[jcrew2001]

107. balls

I'll support the Dem nominee, but I want the person to put their money where his mouth is. If he wants to be president, he should put all his chips in. I didn't donate to Kerry so that it would be embezzled into his 2008 run, I should have specified that I wanted the money spent for 2004, for him to win!

I'll bet Hillary, Edwards, etc. will have the common sense to spend everything they've got if they win the nomination.

[LittleClarkie]

162. Did you donate to him in the primaries?

That was the money that was left over.

[jcrew2001]

144. 2004

Maybe Kerry didn't want to be President in 2004? What makes you think he's not going to save another 15 mill for his retirement fund or maybe his 2012 presidential bid.

[laugle]

168. Frankly, the one with the biggest balls....is

Nancy Pelosi!!! She will put them all to shame.........go Nancy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL.......nice to see a little humor.....once in awhile........

[against all enemies]

98. He had balls in Viet Nam, but that was a long time ago.

I wish he would just go away. The thought of him running again makes me sick.

[PresidentObama]

99. I'm glad a good man and great Senator...

Makes you sick.

He can run if he wants to run. If you think he has no chance in the primary, nothing to worry about then...right?

[ProSense]

102. Maybe you should avoid threads like these for your health. n/t

[blm]

106. He's faced more serious malice head on than most DC Dems put together.

Vietnam was NOTHING compared to becoming a target for his investigations into IranContra, BCCI, illegal wars in Central America, and CIA drugrunning.

Kerry even became a target when he testified for gays to serve openly in the military.

Anyone who thinks Kerry's bravest years was during Vietnam hasn't read the National Security Archives or paid much attention toi the last 35 years of this nation's governance.

You don't become the the lawmaker who has investigated and exposed more goverb=nment corruption than any other lawmaker without a backbone and personal character.

What Kerry never had in 2004 was a Dem party organization that secured the election process for Dem voters in the four years they were charged with doing so. He also never had many Dems willing to back him up on serious issues he raised like Tora Bora, and Ruimsfeld's firing for Abu Ghraib - because big name Dems, including Bill Clinton, were siding with Bush on those matters and other major military decisions.

[LittleClarkie]

104. not according to opensecrets.org he's not

You got that info from Donna Brazille initially. She is not s person I trust.

That was primary money, he couldn't use it in the general, he gave money to anyone who asked and more than any candidate before him.

According to opensecrets.org, the money he has left is not much more than what Gore had left when he was finished.

[zulchzulu]

173. There you go with the facts again...sheesh...this is a facts-free thread

So what if Edwards is running...no trashing there...adoration galore for Obama...

This thread is meant for fact-challenged angry moles to trash Kerry at any chance they can. You, by introducing facts and such, are making this thread more "nuanced" than these Kerry-trashing moles can handle.

My advice to you is to join in the fun! Trash Kerry for no apparent reason other than possibly being a sucker for Rove's lies...

:mad:

[UrbScotty]

95. Please God, no. (nt)

[Joey Liberal]

101. Kerry should stay out of the race

Kerry can do far more good for this country in the Senate. He has no chance of winning.

[PresidentObama]

103. If he has no chance of winning the primaries

Why worry?

Just give him a nice golf clap, and let him do his own thing.

A lot of people in the 08' race on the Democratic side I don't think have a chance of winning, but I give them the courtesy of my ear and let them spill their guts of why in the hell they think they are equiped to run our nation in these trying times.

I'll listen to all candidates, from Hillary to Kerry to Kucinich. I'll listen to their plans, their positions, and their campaign messages. I have my candidate, but I'm not narrow enough to shut out any candidate just yet. Especially when I could be swallowing my tongue for that candidate if they get the nomination.

....And for good measure, Kerry 2008!! :evilgrin:

[LittleClarkie]

105. Indeed, why beat one's tits about it in anguish

So he runs, and if he has no chance he goes down in flames. Then I nominate him for Attorney General. End of story.

[lady lib]

108. Ditto.

That is all.

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

142. See this is an example of obnoxious! n/t

[talk hard]

145. that's right Prosense --- now you're catching on

piling on ME when there are all kinds of other people you can spread your unpleasantness to that dont' agree with you --- PROOF POSITIVE that you are a bully piling on ONE PERSON

[Strawman]

119. That's about as exciting as a wet baloney sandwich

[talk hard]

122. I'd rather have the wet balony sandwich.

[ProSense]

124. Here you are

(add water)


Can you eat it in another thread?

[talk hard]

126. hovering on the thread are you?

you better get used to the idea that more people than you will admit to think Kerry is far out of the running its laughable --- really really laughable

and that we are entitled to that opinion in spite of soem of you being bullies

[ProSense]

127. Will you get used to the idea that he can run if he wants to?

speaking of hovering and bullying, how many posts do you have in that thread?

Am I and other Kerry supporters entitled to our opinions?

[talk hard]

128. Did I say not to run?? No, I did not

So, why don't you go pester somebody else in this thread that expressed not supporting him --- there are plenty of them that you seem to have ignored and chose to pile on me. I couldn't care less what you think and I'll post anywhere I feel like. You are not in charge here so stay out of my face. See ya.

[ProSense]

129. Good, we're on the same page:

people are free to express their opinions, whether you or I like it or not.

It's not bullying it's responding, and it works both ways.

[talk hard]

130. no, you're a bully ---- you pile on people & try to beat them down

Ain't gonna work with me though --- nice try tho --- in fact, I dislike Kerry more now, how else could people feel with supporters like you? That's the really funny part of all this .... something that I'm sure is lost on you.

[ProSense]

136. No, not because you say so. I dislike a lot of people more now too.

Some people are obnoxious, but try to project on others. That's not lost on me.

[Name removed]

146. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[talk hard]

179. I agree, telling me to go to another thread first thing was obnoxious

and then you turning around falsely claiming projection is really funny --- you obviously are projecting YOUR OWN OBNOXIOUS BEHAVIOR. A blind person could see that. What's your excuse?

[PresidentObama]

183. Did you take your pills today?

:evilgrin:

Your crusade against Senator Kerry is the only thing that is laughable, not the thought that a man who argueably just like Gore never lost will be running for President. A man who is highly qualified during the time of war with experience in foreign policy and whom is a war veteran may or may not run for President. None of that is laughable.

Your logic-less posts are the laughable aspects of this thread.

It's like watching the Swift Boat Veterans for 'Truth' advertisements all over again. Baseless attacks targeted at a good man from someone who is full of shit.

[jgraz]

207. First straightjacket, now pills?

Seriously Kerry2008, you need to get some new material.

talk hard, don't let the bullies get you down. Welcome to DU and the Cult of Saint Kerry :hi:

[NightOwwl]

152. How can a guy so smart...

be so stupid.

[wisteria]

157. Now, I think it is smart what he is doing. If he does decide to do it.

He will run if he feels he has something to offer this country that the other candidates don't. He will state his case and he will debate the issues with all his experience and 20 years in the Senate.
His concern is for the proper direction of this country. I see nothing stupid in that.

[mtnsnake]

172. People who are smart aren't always smart in all ways.

Kerry is a prime example of that. As smart as he is in many other ways, he's just about the un-smartest campaigner going. Now that we all know that, the guy won't stand a chance if he runs.

[Imagevision]

153. Question:If kerry Ran, wouldn't he simply be swift-boated again and

smeared as he was in 2004? They could almost use the same video to accomplish this. Because Kerry has done nothing to change election fraud, the very thing that caused his loss to Bush.

Kerry interviewed by MSNBC a few days after the election stated that he believed the Bin Laden tape released just days before the election is what; "did me in"

[jcrew2001]

154. Retirement

Kerry's running to save another 15 million in his retirement fund. Its all about the money to him.

Its also called embezzelment.

[YvonneCa]

155. Clearly...

...you need to educate yourself on this subject. A little too much FoxNewsChannel, maybe?

[jcrew2001]

219. so

So you're saying that Kerry didn't have 15 million left over after the campaign. I guess he needs to pay off that 2nd mortgage...good luck john, but i'm not giving you any money, but since i work down the street, maybe i can stop by your beacon hill townhouse and get my donation back, since you never spent it.

[PresidentObama]

184. You have your straight jacket on too tight.

Loosen it up please, some of us are trying to have meaningful debates :)

[beachmom]

245. That's a serious charge that requires serious proof.

Of course, you have none. I see a lot of irrationality on this thread.

[wisteria]

156. Old smears won't work any longer. No shock value any longer.

People know what was done to Kerry in 04 and they know what they got instead of a real leader. I wouldn't worry about the old stuff. That is easy to overcome.And, the good news is they have nothing left to smear him with.

[Pierzin]

167. OMG! OMG! OMG!!! WOW!!!

What if Kerry AND Gore decided to run??? HAHAHHA! That would be inSANE!!!
That's very interesting.

[Apollo11]

169. Kerry's candidacy should be annulled!

None of my business, and I'm not quick to judge others (I am also in my second marriage), but the facts disturb me.

John Kerry married Julia Thorne in 1970. They had 2 daughters together, born in 1973 and 1976.

They separated in 1982 and their divorce was finalised in 1988.

Then several years later, Kerry asks the Catholic Church to annul his first marriage.

The reason behind this was that Teresa Heinz - a widow - wanted to marry in church. As a divorcee, Kerry couldn't get re-married in the Catholic Church. Not unless the Church would agree to annul his first marriage.

But Teresa continued to use her first husband's name. According to her wikipedia entry: "She chose to keep her name as Teresa Heinz, and also remained a registered Republican, until John Kerry's presidential bid."

"Teresa Heinz was a registered Republican for most of her voting career, the same as her first husband, Senator Heinz, and she remained a registered Republican despite being married to the Democratic Senator John Kerry. However, being a registered Republican was politically incongruous with being married to a Senator running for President on the Democratic ticket. In January 2003, she changed her registration to the Democratic Party. Later in 2004, she reportedly changed her name from Teresa Heinz to Teresa Heinz Kerry during her husband's presidential run. After her husband's defeat, in January 2005 she changed her name back to Teresa Heinz."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teresa_Heinz

Some more interesting quotes in this article from the Washington Post back in 2002:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A39691-2002May31?language=printer

It's also real interesting to see what wikipedia has to say about annulment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annulment

"Marriages that are annulled under the Catholic Church are usually considered as ab initio, meaning that the marriage has been essentially invalid from the beginning."

Also according to wikipedia, Julia Thorne authored two books in the 90s. The titles speak for themselves.
- You Are Not Alone: Words of Experience and Hope for the Journey Through Depression (1993)
- A Change of Heart: Words of Experience and Hope for the Journey Through Divorce (1996)

Julia Thorne died last year, age 61.

After Thorne's death following a long battle with cancer, Kerry released the following statement: "Julia was the best mother two daughters could ask for. She always put our kids ahead of everything. She was completely committed to them and their future. Julia fought a hugely courageous fight against cancer and she passed away with the same grace with which she lived. Everyone who knew her will miss her beyond words."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Thorne

This is the woman with whom he was married for 12 years, but later on he decided they were never really married.

Well, I guess you could say that John Kerry is one smooth talker!

But I'm not saying that the guy isn't smart ...

[ProSense]

189. WTF? Ultimately desperate. n/t

[ecstatic]

170. Let's see...

The IWR vote: Strikes 1 through infinity

Not counting the votes: Strikes infinity + 1 (is that possible?)

Still not getting it: :crazy: Priceless...

[mtnsnake]

176. He couldn't even beat an imbecile who had already proven to be worst Pres ever

so all I can say to Kerry is...Good luck!

[PresidentObama]

186. Kerry lost?

News to me.

Did Gore lose too? If so, are you counting him out?

[mtnsnake]

205. haha, I'm sure it IS news to you

and no, Gore didn't lose to Bush. He won the popular vote and the Supreme Court awarded Bush an unjust "victory". Big difference.

It's amazing to think Kerry couldn't muster up enough votes, especially considering he had the advantage of running against someone who had already proven themselves to be the worst president in history, bar none, in a previous term. The only reason Kerry got as many votes as he did was because the election was ABB.

[Faux pas]

177. I wasted my vote on him once, and that was enough thanks. n/t

[PresidentObama]

185. If thats the case....

We wasted our votes on Gore, and he's finished off as well?

I hope your wrong, because I like both Kerry and Gore. And both have the right to run, being as I want evidence to prove they lost.

[wisteria]

178. Sen. Kerry was the best vote I ever made for a Presidential candidate.

He came close to unseating a war time President- something that has never been accomplished before in our history. He received more votes than Gore did in 2000 and Clinton did in his first and second run. He managed to bring in more youth vote and jump started the need for grassroots politics again. He personally, renewed my interest in politics and government polices and I think without the disenfranchisement in Ohio he would be our President today.
He has continued to prove he still have our back and the backs of our fighting men and women.
Sure, it will be difficult for him this time around, but I think he has what it takes to fight for what is important and he feels he can offer this country what the other candidates can not, so he will have my vote and my support again- gladly.

[Name removed]

182. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wisteria]

188. Kerry supports have something to say in support of a good man. n/t

[jgraz]

190. Then say it without abusing those who disagree

Take a look at the wreckage above. Deleted post after deleted post, mostly due to personal attacks from Kerry supporters. How do you think your candidate would feel about this kind of support?

[ProSense]

191. Incredible spin! Most were deleted because

the posts, not by Kerry supporters, were obnoxious or off base (more likely a wingnut-type attack).

[jgraz]

194. Once again, looking at the facts is not that difficult

Unless it completely undermines your argument...

Post: "Ugh, stay out"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Oh Yippee, NOT"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Ick"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "groooooaaan"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "I wonder if he's going to use his army of lawyers that were going to.."
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "You had your chance, John. And you lost"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Whoopdie f'ing doo. nt"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Kerry should just go back to work and take Joe biden with him..."
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Yep -- zero faith"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Don't waste my time!"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: OP
Response: Deleted Message
Response: "Bullshit"
Response: Deleted Message

Post: "Kerry should stay out of the race"
Respone: "Ditto"
Response: Deleted Message


By my count, there are only two deleted messages that were not written in response to anti-Kerry posts. One of them was mine (#84), and both were in response to personal attacks that were also deleted. I challenge you to find ONE anti-Edwards, anti-Clinton or anti-Obama thread that has a pattern like this.

It's this disconnect from reality that makes it so hard to engage with all y'all on an adult level. Most people on this board respect honest support for candidates, even if it's someone that they personally don't like. Most of us DO NOT respect bullying and denial of obvious facts.

[ProSense]

195. I'm glad no one is paying you to do research (at least I hope not)

because the first 10 on your list are by "the obnoxious" poster.

[jgraz]

197. Lookup "No True Scotsman" fallacy, then get back to me

[ProSense]

199. "Most people on this board respect honest support for candidates..."

That's from your previous post, and I wholeheartedly agree. Still, there is a tinge, actually a huge amount of hypocrisy:

link

link

[jgraz]

200. Can you really not tell the difference between a bash of Kerry and a personal attack on you?

Especially just a re-post of someone else's article? Do you feel that Andy Borowitz was attacking you personally? It think there's a name for that...

But please keep looking....if you can find one post where I show a lack of respect for someone's support of Kerry (as opposed to simple disagreement or lack of respect for bullies) I'll be happy to repudiate it. I make no attempt to hide my strong dislike for Kerry as a presidential candidate, but that's very different from deriding someone for disgreeing with me (or, for that matter, disrespecting Kerry's service in the Senate).

[ProSense]

201. I do,

see post 182.

[jgraz]

204. heh -- I can see where the mods might not have liked that one

Still, the original point stands: you don't do your candidate any favors by personally attacking those who don't support him. That's certainly not how Kerry himself would handle it.

[zulchzulu]

203. Do you feel that Kerry-bashing behavior is productive?

I'm curious.

It seems that any mention of Kerry on this board gets lovely ad hominem genius splattered all through the thread.

Are Kerry bashers secretly insecure that Kerry is actually appealing to people? Do they feel that they must strike out in such a manner that only offers negative, unsubstantial attacks?

[jgraz]

206. I think it can be

Say what you will, Kerry left a lot of bad feelings in Dems after his 2004 campaign. Venting those feelings on a public forum is not necessarily a bad thing. I also think that most of the attacks on Kerry, though harsh, are not ad hominem. Very few people just post "Kerry is an asshole" and leave. Even the "ugh, please no" posters will likely back up their posts with reasoned opinion if you give them the chance.

Of course, I can't speak for all the anti-Kerry posters, so I'll just speak for myself. Even my harshest attacks on a Kerry candidacy are based on a sincere belief that he would be a disastrous nominee for the Dems in 2008. I also have some strong questions, given his behavior in the 2004 race, as to how good a leader he would be if he did get elected.

There's also the opposite use of ad hominem, which Kerry supporters engage in all the time: you simply state that he is a "good man" and that's why you're supporting him. It's about as reasonable and "constructive" as stating that one is not supporting him because he's a jerk.

[zulchzulu]

208. Consider if someone trashed your candidate of choice...

I as well as others that support Kerry over the other candidates CAN back it up with detailed reasons why.

Additionally, I think that most Kerry supporters could give you reasons why they might think the other candidates would not be the best candidate, but they refrain from literally seeming to hunt out threads on those candidates so they can can piss all over the thread with lame, uninformed and perhaps childish comments.

If Kerry is such a bad candidate in your eyes, then you should feel completely confident that he will not be the possible nominee. Support or enlighten us on who your candidate is and their strengths.

You're certainly not going to change the minds of people who support Kerry by entertaining us with your sordid opinions backed up with nothing but what appears to be an unqualified grudge with lack of real evidence.

[jgraz]

209. Have at it

I don't really have a candidate of choice, but if I did I'd have no problem with posts that criticized him or her. I certaintly wouldn't accuse the critics of being freepers or "off their meds".

I have no expectations of changing your mind wrt your support of Kerry. I got into this whole debate initially as a response to the vicious bullying of other Kerry detractors. What I'd like to see is an end to the attacks on people who don't share your unqualified support of your candidate.

[zulchzulu]

210. I'll start another thread with why I would support Kerry in 2008...

I'll then see if you comment on that...

[jgraz]

211. I might, but I generally stay away from pissing on pro-Kerry OPs

I don't think it's really helpful to jump in on an OP just to say "you're wrong", unless there's some genuine misrepresentation going on. Especially wrt Kerry, I tend to either support others who are being attacked or to post my own threads.

If you really want a debate on it, I'll be happy to respond with the reasons I don't support him.

ETA: No matter what, I'd like to see your post. I'd especially be interested in why you think he'd win the general this time around.

[blm]

212. Most support him because he's a top anti-corruption, open government Democrat

and that wing of the party is very UNDER-represented. You don't seem to think that wing of the party deserves a topnotch voice.

It also explains why establishment Dems did little to support the 2004 campaign.

[jgraz]

213. It has nothing to do with which wing of the party I support

After all, Kerry can be that voice just fine in the Senate. I just happen to think he's a hopeless campaigner who has no shot without the Anybody But Bush votes he got in 2004.

But now that you mention it, the "wing" of the party I'd like to support most is the anti-WAR wing. Kerry's got too much baggage in that area to get my vote in the primaries.

[blm]

215. He helped to end more wars than most other DC lawmakers. And I don't BUY the BS

that the IWR took this nation to war. IWR would have PREVENTED war with any other president implementing it, even Reagan.

The Downing Street Memos PROVE that IWR didn't matter, and Gonzalez even testified under oath last summer that WH knew that IWR didn't give Bush any extra war powers.

[jgraz]

220. I agree with all of that

My problem with Kerry is that he should have known this before his vote (like Feingold, Kucinich, Wellstone, etc did), and he REALLY should have known this during the 2004 campaign, yet he was unable to clearly articulate that. His "knowing what I know now I still would have voted for it" was the point at which he lost the election, IMHO.

I also don't recall him saying ANYTHING when the DSM's broke in 2005, though I admit I wasn't paying close attention to him at that point.

[blm]

222. Kerry wrote the Letter of Inquiry on DSM that was signed by 9 other senators.

All it would have taken for an investigation was FIVE Dem senators on the Intel Committee or 4 of them and Harry Reid to sign on. Just one did.

Kerry clearly said he would support a resolution that would authorize force IF NECESSARY and opposed the decision to invade because he said the IWR's weapon inspections and diplomatic measures were proving military force was not needed.

Once the war was engaged Kerry said to get UN and NATO involved and to do that you needed more troops to secure Iraq so UN and NATO troops could more easily take over. (Kerry and Kofi Annan were good friends, btw, so Kerry wasn't saying this in a vacuum)

Once the Iraqis held their elections in 2005, Kerry said bring home a significant number of troops so the Iraqis would see we had no intention of staying as oocupiers, and he drafted his first withdrawal plan in Oct 2005.

He submitted two other withdrawal plans as civil war became the reality in Iraq in April 2006 and June 2006.

I never had the problem comprehending his position that the corpmedia seemed to have.

[jgraz]

244. Fair enough -- let's see where he goes with it now that the Dems are in charge

[AtomicKitten]

214. I look forward to him actually articulating

in the present tense as opposed to ancient history that which you claim repeatedly, ad nauseam.

It is unfortunate he did not use the bully pulpit during the 2004 election when he had the attention of the nation to rally for this cause. When opportunity knocks and all that.

[blm]

216. It is a shame his campaign felt too beholden to Clinton to speak out about the

investigations Kerry led that Clinton chose to cover up for Bush1 once he took office.

I agree - his campaign was awful in their condescension to Clinton on that serious point. Guess it's to be expected when Clinton's boys were running the DNC and that was the only central organization for the party and its nominee.

If I was a Dem spokesperson with access to all those shows, I would have brought it up constantly and gotten the truth out - wouldn't you?


http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[AtomicKitten]

218. And IF that is true (which is absurd), whose fault is that?

Unless you are implying Kerry was Clinton's own personal sock-puppet, Kerry is responsible for the decision-making in his own campaign.

He's a grown man, you know, and all the excuses offered up for his shortcomings make him look really lame(r).

[blm]

226. Believe what you want - Historic record doesn't change just because you believe Clinton

didn't do what the records clearly prove he did.

Guess you DIDN'T read the National Security Archives or watch the documentary American Gangster on BET. SOMEONE in the WH in 1996 had to call for Gary Webb to be taken down and have his investigative report treated like it was a fantasy in order to protect Bush1. Clinton was president then.

And that was AFTER he chose to not pursue outstanding matters on IranContra, BCCI, and Iraqgate in 1993.

But, of course, to you, only absurd people seek out the congressional records in the National Security Archives.

And your main target for your derision is Kerry, the one who uncovered most of the corruption in those documents. That says alot about your concern for good governance. You like the lawmakers who have the greatest ACT, not the ones with the greatest concern for open government.

[AtomicKitten]

227. what I believe is Kerry is a grown man and responsible for his decisions

that's what I believe

[blm]

230. I understand his decision - hard to be one of the few when you're in a full team

situation that requires a united front to win, like a national election.

You certainly seem to ignore accountability for Bill Clinton and his grown man decisions that led to the Bush2 regime in the first place. You defend HIS grown man decisions by attacking anyone who points out what he did and the real consequences of his decisions.

[AtomicKitten]

231. I will not feed your incessant need to blame, blm

(edited for accuracy: incessant, hysterical, pathologic need to blame)

you're on your own

[blm]

232. Good. I didn't think you could answer that, anyway.

.

[mtnsnake]

239. That's hysterical...you blaming Bill Clinton for Bush2 getting in the WH

You wanna place blame? You don't have to look any further than Kerry's pathetic campaign. Too bad it wasn't Bill running against Bush2. He would've creamed him. I think the only person on the face of the earth who could've possibly lost to Bush was John Kerry. What a shame Dean got screwed.

Like father like son...four years and you're done. Too bad Kerry blew it. We could've rubbed it in to Bush with that saying.

[mtnsnake]

238. "just because you believe Clinton didn't do what the records clearly prove he did"

Good gawd, speaking of broken records...

[zulchzulu]

196. What's actually interesting are those that have to attack Kerry against DU policy

From here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

"Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

"Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements."

Food for thought, eh?

[jgraz]

198. I'll defer to the mods on what violates DU rules

And they seem to be fine with most of the posts you're complaining about. At the very least, the attacks on Kerry in this thread seem to have somehow avoided the "deleted message" treatment.

Edit: my understanding of that rule is that it applies to attacking Dems in favor of their non-Dem opponents. Stating a preference for one Dem over another (even a really really strong preference) is just fine.

[Vektor]

202. Godspeed, Senator Kerry!

Best of luck should you decide to run. You have my support.

[jcrew2001]

221. Donation

Are you going to donate more money to this swindler? He's got to pay off his mortgage, those APR rates are going up now, hopefully he switched to a fixed rate. Hey John, if I give you money can I stay at your Nantucket house or going skiing at your Vail house? I've got some great business ideas if you really want to spend that 15 million.

[ProSense]

224. Swindler? WTF? Is Hey John your site?

Get a clue!

[LittleClarkie]

229. Think about where you got that info

and if you trust the woman who told you he had 15 million. Also, are you sure he still has it? Meanwhile, even though he couldn't use it for himself, he did give out all that was asked of him monetarily during the 2004 campaign and more than any candidate had before him.

So you gave. Sucks to be you if you don't like who you gave your money to. But you gave it to John Kerry, not ABB. So guess what. He gets to do with it what he wants.

And as I said before, unless you gave during the primaries, it ain't your money he had left over.

And I'd like the word of someone OTHER than Donna Brazille that he even had that much. Meanwhile, she should talk, because Gore had quite a bit left over at the end of his campaign too.

[YvonneCa]

241. Yes, I will donate. ..

...How old are you?

[YvonneCa]

242. Mine, too ! n/t

[WCGreen]

223. Oh joy,.... rapture.....

[BlueManDude]

225. I predict he won't run for re-election to the Senate.

[AtomicKitten]

228. that would be a terrible loss for Massachusetts

I would be very sorry to see him roll the dice in that way.

[jgraz]

235. If he does that, then I'm DEFINITELY against him running

He's a great Senator and a terrible presidential candidate. For him to pull a Bob Dole would be the worst of all worlds. I hope all the Kerry supporters are urging him to NOT give up his seat in the Senate.

[BlueManDude]

237. Seems that many take one last shot at the WH then go away

I think that's what he'll do.

[Zynx]

233. He had his chance and blew it.

That campaign was winnable, but his flaws as a candidate lost it. He has further shown he has not learned anything.

[ProSense]

234. Kerry 2008! n/t

[mdmc]

236. go get em!

Hope he runs as an anti-war hero this time.

[LSK]

240. I love Kerry to death, but he should not try again n/t

[YvonneCa]

243. I love John Kerry to death and he SHOULD run. n/t