Two personal experiences with John Kerry, and why I'd support him...

[WilliamPitt]

...if he runs again in '08.

It seems that every time Kerry's name is mentioned on DU, specifically in any kind of context regarding 2008, there are howls of indignation and dismay. This is, to no small degree, understandable; he voted for the IWR way back when, albeit with solid comments on the parameters of that vote, and he conceded the 2004 election before any kind of hard look could be taken at what took place in Ohio.

Fair enough. My purpose for this post isn't to try and talk anyone out of their opinions of the man, or to convince them that those opinions are wrong. Rather, I want to share two personal experiences I had with the man while covering the last presidential election. These experiences, for my money, speak volumes about him as a person and as a candidate.

The first experience took place at the New York City apartment of Al Franken in December of 2003. In attendance were Franken and his wife Franni; Rick Hertzberg, senior editor for the New Yorker; David Remnick, editor for the New Yorker; Jim Kelly, managing editor for Time Magazine; Howard Fineman, chief political correspondent for Newsweek; Jeff Greenfield, senior correspondent and analyst for CNN; Frank Rich, columnist for the New York Times; Eric Alterman, author and columnist for MSNBC and the Nation; Art Spiegelman, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist/author of 'Maus'; Richard Cohen, columnist for the Washington Post; Fred Kaplan, columnist for Slate; Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate and author; Jonathan Alter, senior editor and columnist for Newsweek; Philip Gourevitch, columnist for the New Yorker; Calvin Trillin, freelance writer and author; Edward Jay Epstein, investigative reporter and author; Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., who needs no introduction.

In other words, the heaviest swordsmen of political journalism. DUer Pete Daou was working for the Kerry campaign and finagled an invitation for me, and so there I sat with all these serious people in Franken's apartment. Kerry came in with two staffers, sat in the middle of all these people, and took questions for about three hours.

Think about that a second. Three hours. There are not a whole lot of big-time politicians, Republican or Democrat, who could withstand that kind of intense on-the-record grilling from that kind of crew. There aren't many who would volunteer willingly to do so. To be sure, Bush would never in hell put himself in that position. Kerry did, and did magnificently. He handled every question and ran from none.

A few weeks later, I caught up with Kerry while he was riding the rods in New Hampshire and rode with him and his crew in their van on the way to a high school confab with environmentally-conscious teenagers. His manner with his staff was exceedingly casual, and he was nothing but friendly to me. To be sure, it could easily have been an act - I have gained some firsthand experience in the difference between how politicians treat staff when reporters are present and how they treat staff when reporters are not there - but I got a sense that this was a genuine person.

He got to the high school and there were maybe 50 kids in the room, along with Jeff Greenfield and other big-time MSM folks. Kerry gave an extraordinary talk on the need for a new energy policy focused on alternative fuels. He described it not only as important for the planet, but as a front-and-center national security issue.

"When I came back from Vietnam," he said at one point, "I became involved in Earth Day. This was 1970, and then I was chairman of Earth Day in New England in 1990. We actually painted Storrow Drive biodegradable green, and we had hundreds of booths up and down the Charles River showing people what the technologies of the future could do. I've been chairman of the Oceans Committee in the Senate. I?ve written our fisheries laws, I've written our plastics pollution laws, our marine mammal protection laws, our flood insurance laws, our coastal zone management laws. I was in Rio for the Earth Summit in 1990. I was at Buenos Aires, Kyoto, The Hague for the global warming conferences. I've helped negotiate with the less developed countries on those issues. I led the fight to stop Newt Gingrich from literally killing the Clean Air Act. I led the fight as a Lieutenant Governor to make acid rain a national issue, and it's now in the Clean Air Act. I led the fight to stop the drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. I come to this race with a long and passionate record of caring about the environment."

"Sometimes in America," he continued "the environment becomes a really bad discussion. People like George Bush and his friends will say, 'You have a choice. You can have a job, or you can have a clean environment.' Have you ever heard that argument? Jobs or environment, right? It's a false choice. Cleaning up the environment can be jobs. In Massachusetts, the fastest-growing part of our economy is environmental companies that do clean-up of toxic waste and chemicals, and to consult with companies so they don't spit out dirty water and the like. I'm convinced that a good President can help bring the country together in a way that doesn't lose us jobs, and in a way that helps create a better future, and that's why I'm running. That's why I'm here."

So this is it for me. Yes, he has made some bad decisions. Yes, there is reason to be pissed at the man. But I think about his willingness to wade into a three-hour confrontation with the editors and writers of the heaviest political publications in the country. I think about how well he stood his ground, made his arguments (and apologies, in regards to the IWR vote). I think about him talking to those kids at that school, about how utterly genuine is his desire to defend the environment and, in the process, defend our economy, the planet and our national security. I think about how goddam smart he is, and how both these instances displayed that intelligence so completely clearly.

I think he would make a magnificent president, and I think it is nothing less than a full-spectrum calamity that he is not president right now. If he ran again, I am not sure I would support him in the primaries, simply because I do not know who else will be running. But if he gets the nomination, he will have 100% of my support and energy. I don't base this decision on what I've read at DU or elsewhere, but on what I have seen from the man with my own two eyes.

*donning flame suit*

So take that for whatever it is worth.

(PS, Franken has the coolest bathroom in the history of plumbing. It is festooned with Nixon memorabilia; he has the photo of Elvis signing up to be an honorary DEA agent with those catastrophically zooted eyes, a dozen other bits and pieces, and the best thing - the original "I hereby resign" letter recieved by Kissinger that bears Kissinger's initialed I-read-this signature at the bottom. It is framed right above the toilet. Best piss I ever took in my life.)

[Vincardog]

1. If Kerry wants to run again he better dump those fucking advisers.

He better speak his mind forcefully and truthfully and leave the centrist crap to the dead armadillos.

[SeattleGirl]

4. I agree Vincardog -- Kerry would need to dump his advisors

I think he has done quite well since the selection, bringing things up, talking about them as needs to be done. If he does run again, he will need to continue doing that. I know he is very articulate and very bright. He cannot let the nutjobs who handled him last time do it again if there is a next time.

And Will, thanks for the stories (and the peek into Al's bathroom!).

[Vektor]

14. He knows, Vincardog.

In retrospect, he's well aware of which staffers did not have his best interests at heart, and they are no longer working for him.

[blm]

2. What's amazing is that FEW of those heavyhitting newsies gave any

significant reporting of that event or any coverage or discussion of Kerry's actual positions that didn't fit into the storyline that they were already presenting.

[TankLV]

173. How so unfortunately very true.

sigh.....

[cally]

3. Yes, Kerry is a good man

I would love to have him as a President. I think he was/is a horrible candidate. I would support him as the Democratic nominee but not with my heart and soul. The man I've always wanted as President is Al Gore. I supported him before he ran as the VP with Clinton. If Gore runs, I will sign up for his campaign immediately.

[mike_c]

5. "He handled every question and ran from none."

What was his answer to why he supported an illegal war of aggression against a disarmed country that was no threat to the US or anyone else? Surely in such an august gathering of political journalists, someone asked some flavor of that question. I'd really be interested in Kerry's answer.

[WilliamPitt]

8. Here you go

"Senator," said Alterman, "I think you may be the most qualified candidate in the race, and perhaps also the one who best represents my own values. But there was one overriding issue facing this nation during the past four years, and Howard Dean was there when it counted, and you weren't. A lot of people feel that moment entitles him to their vote, even if you have a more progressive record and would be a stronger candidate in November. How are you going to win back those people who you lost with your vote for this awful war?"

"This was the hardest vote I have ever had to cast in my entire career," Kerry said. "I voted for the resolution to get the inspectors in there, period. Remember, for seven and a half years we were destroying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, we found more stuff there than we thought we would. After that came those four years when there was no intelligence available about what was happening over there. I believed we needed to get the weapons inspectors back in. I believed Bush needed this resolution in order to get the U.N. to put the inspectors back in there. The only way to get the inspectors back in was to present Bush with the ability to threaten force legitimately. That's what I voted for."

"The way Powell, Eagleberger, Scowcroft, and the others were talking at the time," continued Kerry, "I felt confident that Bush would work with the international community. I took the President at his word. We were told that any course would lead through the United Nations, and that war would be an absolute last resort. Many people I am close with, both Democrats and Republicans, who are also close to Bush told me unequivocally that no decisions had been made about the course of action. Bush hadn't yet been hijacked by Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney and that whole crew. Did I think Bush was going to charge unilaterally into war? No. Did I think he would make such an incredible mess of the situation? No. Am I angry about it? You're God damned right I am. I chose to believe the President of the United States. That was a terrible mistake."

(snip)

The most revealing moment of the entire event came as it was breaking up. Kerry was slowly working towards the door when he was collared by Art Spiegelman. Though Kerry towered over him, Spiegelman appeared to grow with the intensity of his passion. "Senator," he said, "the best thing you could do is to is to just come out and say that you were wrong to trust Bush. Say that you though he would keep his promises, but that you gave him more credit than he deserved. Say that you?re sorry, and then turn the debate towards what is best for the country in 2004."

Kerry nodded, bowed his head, and said, "You're right. I was wrong to trust him. I'm sorry I did." And then he was gone.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/121003A.shtml

[BurtWorm]

11. I will always have a problem with any Democrat who demonstrated

an acceptance of the supposed "legitimacy" of Bush with a positive IWR vote. IWR was the moment for any Dem who doubted Bush's legitimacy to underscore it. You don't authorize an illegitimate "president" to do a damn thing, least of all, anything he wants to, in any area of policy.

Nevertheless, I don't write off anyone for a single mistake or action I disagree with. Still, the problem remains.

[Vektor]

15. I think it says something

that he admitted to his misjudgment, and actually expressed apology. The answer he gave was pretty honest and forthright. He didn't try to gloss over the mistake the way Bush does when questioned about errors in judgment.

[GeorgeGist]

23. Unfortunately (and this is my biggest beef with Kerry)...

he did gloss over Bush's absence of integrity in PUBLIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The road to hell is paved with the faces of 'nice guys'.

[Vektor]

24. As some of us were discussing upthread...

a lot of the advisers he had who were urging him to "take the high road" were later dismissed.

Live and learn, I guess. I strongly suspect that Kerry will not make that mistake twice.

[TankLV]

175. I hope he does not make that same mistake.

If he has that fire in his belly, there is no telling what he could accomplish.

[BurtWorm]

193. Bush is not that hard a nut to crack.

He's a war-mongering corporate fat cat and a reckless ruinator of American republican democracy. All anyone needs to do to beat him is tell the truth. Finessing the truth gets Democrats nowhere.

[Raksha]

77. You're right...he glossed it over IN PUBLIC

and that turned out to be an almost unforgivable sin. Not intentional, I know, but we all know what they say about the road to hell!

[Imagevision]

167. Kerry claimed OBL video released before the ekection did him in

pure rubbish!

[Dr Ron]

71. Very true--about both

This is also why many of us who opposed the war supported Kerry, despite disagreeing with his IWR vote. His overall view on the war, and opposition to going to war unless we were proven to be threatened by WMD, was the important factor.

[blm]

31. So Alterman didn't know Dean supported Biden-Lugar version of IWR, either

typical media. Kerry and Dean were never that far apart, but media exaggerated the differences and then their campaigns furthered the exaggerations to continue differentiating them on a subject that they were never really so far apart.

That's the part of campaigns that I hate. I would bet anything that both Kerry and Dean regretted their campaigns' exaggerating their differences during the primaries.

[Dr Ron]

46. Some got it right

Just prior to the Iowa caucus both Saon and the Des Moines Register had articles showing that Dean's posiiton on the war was actually virtually the same as Kerry's, despite how the diffrences between them were characterized. I've always wondered if this Des Moines Register article didn't have an impact on Kerry's upset victory.

[blm]

86. Possibly, but I still think both camps didn't help much when they chose

to differentiate on it until the truth finally came out in the Iowa debate.

[Iowa]

99. I don't think it had much of an impact on the Iowa outcome...

The caucuses were different than those I had attended in the past - at least it seemed that way to me. Dean clearly had the organization and the most passionate supporters. I went in as a Kerry supporter - so did my wife and our two adult children. We fully expected to be alone, or among a very few. When we broke into groups, almost every person in the room joined us. We couldn't believe it and the Dean supporters were stunned. Visiting with others in the room, it appeared that every Kerry person went in expecting Dean to prevail, but each of us had tuned out all the background noise and made a quiet, personal, judgment call. It was all about beating Bush, and most of us thought Kerry was the most likely to get it done. Here's why:

I too had the opportunity to meet Senator Kerry, but it was in an entirely different setting - it was in a small town cafe with 20 or 30 people - teachers, farmers, factory workers, teens, and grandmas. We met him as a group and then chatted individually with him afterward. I wish you all could have seen the man. There was a passion, a brilliance, and a genuineness there that was incredible. He invited... no, he encouraged us to go after him, to challenge him, to make him stronger. He was one of the most impressive guys I have ever seen, and I'm not easily impressed. I won't go into all the details, but what Mr. Pitt conveys above is very consistent with my observations and conclusions.

What I saw after he left Iowa and during the debates... well, he wasn't the same man. If Kerry could be that man we saw in that small cafe 100% of the time, he would be unstoppable. That's the John Kerry Iowa catapulted into the spotlight. He has what it takes. But there's another John Kerry in there too. I'm just not sure he can do it.

[TayTay]

137. I know what you mean about the personal guy

I wish there was a way for that to come out too. I met him with a group of DU'ers last Dec and he was a great guy to hang around with and just talk. (And I second Will's observation about Sen. Kerry being very casual with staff. Ahm, very casual. LOL!)

[_dynamicdems]

189. LOLOL! n/t

[madfloridian]

62. blm, don't blame Kerry's vote on Dean. That is so wrong.

You do this all the time. Kerry is good man, but he made a mistake.

When you start that childish "Dean wanted the war too" stuff....it is getting pretty deep now isn't it.

[Dr Ron]

65. That's not what BLM was saying

In case BLM is not around to respond, you are missing the point.

Nobody is blaming Dean for Kerry's vote. The point is that Dean and Kerry had the same position, contrary to many campaign statements.

Both candidates were frequently on record as calling for going to war if we were proven to be threatened by WMD, and opposing war if we weren't.

[madfloridian]

67. No, that is a lie spread by Kerry people to excuse his vote.

Dean always said he was no dove, he never pretended to be. I have all the early statements on all that stuff, and he was able to see that Saddam was no immediate threat at all.

If you guys keep on doing this stuff, you will hurt your own cause.

Dean is no liberal, we all knew that. But he could see through the crap Bush was dishing out. And he paid dearly for speaking out on it. He paid dearly.

[Dr Ron]

69. You are twisting what was said

as you seem to do every time such a thread comes up.

We are not questioning Dean's position, which I agreed with. We are only questioning the claims that there was a major difference between Kerry and Dean's position prior to the war.

It was also not 100% cut and dry that Dean saw that Saddam was no immediate threat. He is on record for calling for military intervention to disarm Saddam if necessary.

Nobody knew for sure. Both Dean and Kerry were right in leaving open the possibility of military action if we were proven to be threatened, and to argue against military intervention unless we were proven to be thrreatened.

[madfloridian]

74. Don't keep implying he supported the war.

And I will quit responding. I always respected that Kerry did what he thought he had to do...until that day on CNN standing in some mountains...he was asked on CNN if he would vote for the war all over again, he said yes he would.

That is when my view changed. I think he knew all along just like the other Dems how Bush would use that resolution. They had to know.

It is not respectful to Kerry to excuse his vote because Dean once said that we might have to go after Saddam...IF he were proven to be an immediate threat.

Quit misrepresenting, and I will quit saying it.

[blm]

80. You miss the point entirely - B-L was not much different than the IWR

version that passed, and in fact, both Kerry and Dean were FOR Biden-Lugar as the preferred version.

Why pretend that Biden-Lugar was so significantly different than IWR, mf? You know it wasn't, and luckily for Dean the media didn't pick up on his prior position until the Iowa debate where Gephardt asked him about it.

But the basic point is that Dean's Biden-Lugar support was not pro-war and neither was IWR pro-war - Bush was in VIOLATION of the IWR when he went to war after weapons inspections proved military force was unnecessary.

[Dr Ron]

82. You are doing the misrepresenting

That is not what Kerry said at the grand canyon. He said he would have voted to give the authorization to use force, believing any President should have such authorization to back themselves up with, but would have used the authorization differently--to seak a diplomatic settlement. He later agreed he should not have given Bush the authorization after the Downing Street Memos proved that Bush had no intention of seekking a diplomatic solution.

Kerry did not have to know at the time how Bush would use the resolution. Bush was saying at the time that he planned to seek a diplomatic solution. As I posted elsewhere, this is what Bush was saying just before the war:

"Later this week, the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America’s military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something."

As for Dean, he has many statements considering war. For example:

Jake Tapper writes, " is -- 'as I've said about eight times today,' says, annoyed -- that Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.
--Jack Tapper in Salon, February 20, 2003

There's many more such comments from Dean. If you want to cherry pick quotations it is possible to claim that either one supported the war.

The fact is that neither supported the war under the circumstances which existed, and neither would have gone to war if President. You are misrepresenting Kerry's position when you claim he was supporting the war or that his position was significantly different from Dean's.

[madfloridian]

87. I have all those statements. If you want to go toe to toe, Ron..

I am quite capable of doing it.

I would rather not do it. But if you want to relive the primaries, like Will has done by bringing up that well-known Franken apt. meeting...then I say let's draw swords and begin.

Frankly I would rather work to keep the party together, and rebuild it the way the DNC chair is doing in spite of opposition from his own party.

I think it would be far more productive to quit excusing any of them who voted for it, let them take their raps for it. Dean took whatever they handed out and kept standing.

Now some always refer back to Biden Lugar as if it excused Kerry and others for voting.

I very much admire the way John Edwards just flat out said he was wrong. It is easier that way than saying it was ok because Dean once supported another version of something that did not pass anyway.

[Dr Ron]

110. It is you who keep trying to relive the primaries

in thread after thread.

Dean's support for Biden Lugar is a significant point. At the time everything Dean said suggested he would have voted yes on the IWR. Both Dean and Kerry preferred the Biden Lugar resolution.

The situation with John Edwards is not analogous. Edwards voted yes and supported the war, and therefore had reason to flat out say he was wrong. Kerry made it clear when he voted for the IWR that he did not support going to war. Therefore he can say he regretted trusting Bush with the authorization granted to him as he misused it, but there is no reason for Kerry to say he was wrong on the war itself.

Nor is Will trying to relive the primaries by bringing this up. It looks quite clear from what he writes that his motivation is to respond to all the unfair Kerry bashing that keeps coming up here, not to relive the primaries.

[madfloridian]

112. Read my post to blm below.

I have all my records together. I have never bashed Kerry, but I am not welcome to defend myself in that forum.

I am not going back to the primaries by posting all that I have. Some of it is painful.

You need to get over putting the responsibiity for Kerry's vote on Dean's back. Kerry voted the way he chose. I have all the info about BL, and Dean said it would tie Bush's hands. Once it was off the table, he said we should not vote for what was left.

Sorry you have a thing about Dean, Ron. Wish you could get over it. I have always respected Kerry, but he voted for the war.

[Dr Ron]

119. Not putting responsibility on Dean

I've said at least once, and I believe more than once, that I supported Dean's position on the war. I don't "have a thing about Dean." It is you who have a thing about Kerry as I've seen you bash him in thread after thread and then claim innocence.

Kerry did not vote "for the war" and did not support the war any more than Dean did. You may disagree with his IWR vote (as I did) but this was not a vote "for the war."

[madfloridian]

125. My husband and I supported Kerry strongly.

We worked hard locally for him. We donated almost a thousand to his campaign. We gave out yard signs we paid for ourselves. When they got stolen we ordered more, and gave them out.

I have never bashed him. I just won't let you get away with not being honest about things.

[blm]

89. Dean's support of Biden-Lugar is not a lie - and I would like to see how

you explain that Biden-Lugar was the antiwar position while IWR was prowar.

In my view both positions were for war only as a last resort and AFTER weapons inspections.

[madfloridian]

111. I never said that, blm...he did say BL would tie Bush's hands.

At least he believed it would. Bush even said that himself...that he did not want his hands tied.

I just checked my files. I have so much. I have old DU posts where you have done this same stuff....excusing Kerry for voting for the war because Dean once said he thought Biden Lugar would tie Bush's hands.

I have quotes coming out the yazoo.....BOTH from Kerry and Dean.

I have sitting and looking at them. And I have been wondering why you and Ron think it so important to paint Howard Dean as being for the war, and Kerry as the innocent.

Hubby and I gave almost a thousand to Kerry and worked for him on the ground. Yet I am not permitted to defend myself against posts in the JK forum that attack me or say untrue things. I have been treated like a traitor in that forum, when I try to defend untrue things. Or half truths.

I looked at all my files again, I just tranferred them into my EditPad Pro. Then I decided after the old old DU threads I have on my hard drive where we already did this long ago.....I decided to just let it go.

I am not going to argue with you on this anymore. Kerry is a big boy. He does not need for Dean to be diminished because he made a wrong vote. He once said Dean was not fit to be president because he said we were no safer with Saddam captured. He blasted Dean for saying Osama should get a fair trial if captured.

He needs to live with those words, as he said them. Dean has paid dearly for every mistake he made in the campaign, and he still pays dearly if he "missteps" and irritates party leaders.

I am not going there with you again. The past is the past, but I will step in if you and Ron keep doing this.

Life is strange, and as I get older I see it more and more. We live with the consequences of our decisions. It is part of life.

[blm]

124. Doesn't matter what you have - Biden-Lugar was NOT the antiwar position

and Dean supported Biden-Lugar.

Fact: Biden-Lugar was not SIGNIFICANTLY different from the IWR that Dean attacked Kerry for. Dean knows it. Kerry knew and fucked up bigtime by letting himself be differentiated to the degree the media did.

And that is the bottom line.

[madfloridian]

130. If that makes you feel better, you just think that.

.

[blm]

134. Well, you're welcome to show that Biden-Lugar was the antiwar position.

.

[Dr Ron]

146. Don't you wish everyone had to vote on the IWR?

It sure would be interesting if Dean and everyone not in the Senate did actually have to vote on the final IWR.

I respect how Clark handled this when asked during the campaign. At first, most likely due to being new to politics, he stumbled a bit. I recall him answering both that he would have voted yes and no during the same week. Finally he came up with the real answer--the IWR was a poor litmus test as to whether someone supported the war, and he left it at that.

[blm]

148. I wish Biden-Lugar was passed. It was a bit better bill, and it sure would

have made the primary less savage.

[Dr Ron]

151. Would have been better

But the unfortunate fact is that no matter how Kerry voted, no matter which resolution passed, and no matter what the Senate did, Bush would have found a way to lie us into the war.

The primaries would have been less savage if not for the IWR, but that is what it was really about. The vote was not about whether we'd go to war--it was a typical Rove trap to divide the opposition.

Not having the IWR issue would not only have kept the primaries less savage. It would have denied Bush a talking point as he claimed Kerry initially supported him in going to war (unfortunatley with the help of some Democrats who fell for this line). Of course if the Democrats had voted someone who voted no, they would have brought up Bush's Cincinatti statements and said that anyone who voted no would not even support the use of force if we were proven to be threatened.

Kerry was corect when he said the only real ways to vote were "yes, but" or "no, but". I wish he had voted "no, but" but I can respect his position in light of his strong anti-war statements.

[Dr Ron]

153. Also wish people paid attention to more than the vote

The vote is one factor, but Kerry had so much more to say in opposition to Bush's policies

There was his Senate floor statement
He had an op ed in the New York Times and Foreign Affairs
There was his Georgetown speech in which he predicted what has gone wrong, and urged Bush not to rush to war
At the onset of the war he protested by calling for regime change in the United States

If people want to bring up the IWR vote, fine. But look at the whole picture and consider all of Kerry's pre-war statements against going to war.

[madfloridian]

160. You just keep on excusing him.

I am sorry but it is wrong to do that.

[Dr Ron]

161. There you go again

Bashing Kerry after I explain the facts behind the situation.

[LittleClarkie]

202. I remember Kerry saying that he'd voted for the IWR to get the inspectors

back in. And they did go back in. Didn't do a lot of good, but there you have it.

But the main point for me is that we were all lied to. I focus on the Bush lie, not who believed that lie. We were lied into this war. They cooked intelligence and produced false evidence.

But I would like to say that it looks to me like both Kerry and Dean would have preferred Biden-Lugar. When that one didn't go through, Kerry had a decision to make that Dean didn't have to make. He made it the best he could. Turned out to be wrong, and he has acknowledged that fact. He did say in his Senate speech on the vote, that if it turned out that there were no WMDs that he would be among the first to shout out. And he was.

Even so, most days, I do see them as being more similar than different. I stand with both of them as we try to rebuild the grassroots. Kerry has apologized for his vote, and he and Dean are working on getting Dems elected in 2006. I'd rather focus on that.

So that's where I'm at.

[LittleClarkie]

208. Truth be known neither IWR or Biden Lugar was supposed to be

a war position. Well, at least they were supposed to be "war as a last resort" positions. It wasn't Dean. It wasn't Kerry. It was Bush who misused the trust given to him. It was Bush who drummed up support for a war that never should have been. It was Bush who backed the Dems into a corner so that the little man could have a war of his very own and play soldier.

I support Kerry. I support Dean. Both men were lied to by the president, as were the American people. That's where my focus is, on the man who wanted the war in the first place. I wish more people would turn their rant cannons in his direction, instead of at each other.

[LittleClarkie]

203. How is saying that the two men had similar positions

blaming Dean for Kerry's vote. If both men would have preferred Biden Lugar, it seems to me that both men were right. It's just that Biden Lugar didn't go through, and one of the two men then had a decision to make that the other didn't. Kerry did his best, and has since acknowledged that trusting the president was wrong, and apologized for his part in the start of the war.

I'd rather focus on 2006, meself. Kerry and Dean are both working on getting Dems elected. So am I.

[mdmc]

188. Dean's feet were held to the fire just before the NYC protest

He came out against the war. I chose him over Kucinich for his war opposistion.

[mike_c]

33. thanks-- I had to run out to the vet's office and just returned....

Hmmm.... Iraq had already agreed to resume weapons inspectors BEFORE the IWR, and it was the U.S. that pulled them out anyway, not Saddam Hussein. But thanks for the response-- that's more or less what I expected, based on Kerry's subsequent public statements.

[Dr Ron]

42. Source for your dates?

I believe you are confusing the IWR with the start of the war. It was just before the war that the US abruptly pulled out the inspectors, not before the IWR vote.

[mike_c]

192. I was referring to the reason they weren't in Baghdad...

...during the early part of Bush's presidency. Clinton pulled the UNSCOM inspectors in December 1998 prior to launching Operation Desert Fox, and the U.N. did not negotiate a return until September 2002, just weeks before the IWR vote in mid October. Then of course Bush pulled them again in March 2003 before they could certify Iraq as being in compliance with U.N. disarmamant mandates.

on edit-- my point was that Iraq had already complied with both the disarmament and, by Sept 2002, the return of UNSCOM inspectors, so saber rattling to "force Saddam to comply" was a lie for U.S. consumption primarily.

[Dr Ron]

40. Kerry's answer understandable in light of Bush's statements on IWR vote

Kerry may have been wrong for trusting Bush, but he was consistent in his opposition to going to war except as a last resort if we were proven to be threatened by WMD.

Here is how Bush described the vote in Cincinnati just prior to the IWR vote:

"Later this week, the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America’s military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only chance — his only choice is full compliance, and the time remaining for that choice is limited."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

Sure Bush was lying, but Kerry's vote was understandable in light of this. Kerry even quoted this statement from Bush.
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=1208

[madfloridian]

64. What I never understood...right after that meeting you went to Kucinich.

I never understood that. Was it January you become part of the Kucinich campaign? Or early February.

This was a nice OP, but you could have left out that meeting. Because as many of us know right after that meeting, things changed. I think you must have known it would cause many to harken back to 04 early on.

[WilliamPitt]

79. I went to Kucinich

because he offered me a job, because I thought what he was saying needed to be a part of the discussion.

Welcome to the "Questioning my Motives" club. You and Koko should get t-shirts or something.

[Dr Ron]

85. Not about support for a single candidate

I see absolutely no contradiction between your post defending Kerry and your support for Kucinich.

The way I see your post, this isn't about saying one person is the one and only good candidate. This is about seeing the good points in each, and refuting the untrue bashing of candidates which happens so much around here.

[madfloridian]

91. I don't bash any candidate. I am not a Kucinich supporter.

But I like him, and I like Kerry.

However, since the day I was run out of the JK forum for defending myself against something posted there about me....well I take up for myself.

[WilliamPitt]

96. We had a JK forum?

Did I miss a memo somewhere?

[Dr Ron]

113. Recent event

She's talking about something which happened very recently in the DU Kerry forum established post-election. She became quite disruptive and it was made clear that she was not welcome in a candidate's forum if her purpose was to disrupt.

[WilliamPitt]

115. Ah

I didn't realize there was a whole JK forum. Thanks.

[Dr Ron]

128. There are many candidate forums here

I believe they were all set up after the election. Kerry has the largest, but there are groups for Clark, Dean, Edwards, Warner, Clinton, Feingold, and several others.

The point is for them to be a place for supporters of a candidate to talk to each other without being bothered by the typical arguments/bashing which comes up here. As you probably picked up from this conversation, one person didn't abide by this very well.

[madfloridian]

132. Others stopped using theirs for gossip long ago.

When I do a search on my name here to find a post someone mentioned, and I see myself being talked about....I somehow think it is ok to defend.

Feel free to go to the others. They don't do that anymore.

[Dr Ron]

138. That is not what happened

Yes, poor innocent you. You make it sound like someone posted about you first. You posted in a thread in the Kerry forum. Nobody said anything about you until your presence there became disruptive to the forum.

[madfloridian]

140. You apparently don't know the whole story.

So I will just leave it there.

[madfloridian]

117. Flat out not true, Ron.

You said you were going to prove the Kos book wrong by bringing up the primaries to prove Dean ran a deceptive campaign. I was not about to let you get away with it.

In fact I said if you were going to launch a move to prove Dean ran a deceptive campaign, that I would pass the word for us to be ready.

Now that is how you present the facts, Ron.

[Dr Ron]

122. Untrue account

It is not worth rehashing all of this here, except to say this is a very distorted account of what was said.

[Dr Ron]

107. Not exactly what happened

You were not "run out" for defending yourself, but for being disruptive.

[madfloridian]

118. You were presenting untrue things, and I defended.

That simple.

[nmliberal]

194. Dr Ron and Will Pitt see things the same way I do

So I think they are really smart!

[TankLV]

174. Very illuminating.

I guess one is never too old to learn something new.

Maybe my harsh feelings for him stem from my disppointment in his "loss".

For the first time ever, on this Monday Evening, 13 March 2006, I can honestly say that if he is again a candidate, I will have to give it my serious consideration.

And if he wins the nod, I will have no doubt in voting FOR him.

This is certainly news to me.

Thanks for sharing this.

I consider myself a news/political junkie - but this is the first I've heard of this.

It helps explain alot.

You really have changed my mind on this one.

[mdmc]

187. He didn't need three hours, he need thirty seconds to say

"You're right. I was wrong to trust him. I'm sorry I did."

all the other shit "vote for inspections, I had no idea they were neo-cons", the way he answered the questions "before he was out the door".

Anyway, thanks for the OP, Will.

[WI_DEM]

6. Senator Kerry is a good man and deserved to win in '04

if he is nominated in '08 I would support him. But I think we do need to go another route in '08. Very rarely do defeated nominees return to actually win. Nixon in '68 was an exception. In Democratic politics it is less common--William Jennings Bryan was 0/3 and Adlai Stevenson 0/2. Furthermore I've come to the conclusion that we need to nominate a Washington outsider. I will grant that he will be better prepared if he ran in '08 for what the republicans would throw at him.

[Dr Ron]

76. Outsider?

In 2008 we need someone who is experienced and knows Washington from the inside. There will be far too much to fix for an outsider to handle after eight years of Bush.

Nixon is not the only exception. Reagan came back from losing the nomination (and being considered unelectable) to win it all.

It looks like Kerry isn't the only one to have previously lost (either the general election or party nomination) who appears to be running again in 2008--including McCain and Edwards.

[blm]

195. Politi-history doesn't MATTER ANYMORE. Corporate media changed everything

and now, IF you're on the fascist team you can go awol during war and still turn the story around to attack your opponents.

You can be part of the funding of terrorism for two decades where you profitted handsomely and still be treated like the only hero with character strong enough to defeat terrorism.

You can be in bed with moneychangers 24/7 and be called a man of God with clear, Christian values.

You can lie in every other sentence and still be called a straightshooter.

You can lose every debate by a long mile and still be called "a strong leader" who can talk to the people.

[zulchzulu]

7. I'm with you...see y'all in the Primaries...

There are a LOT of Kerry supporters out there waiting to join in for some unfinished business. I'm finishing up a documentary through the lens of a grassroots supporter with all the issues that were part of that campaign and a little about what has happened since then.

Rock on...

[emulatorloo]

184. Be sure to post when you finish it -- I would LOVE to see it EOM

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. President Kerry Is One Of The Most Top Notch Politicians There Is IMO.

I don't know if he can rally enough voters to win in 08 after what happened in 04 but I would love to see him try. I think he would make one of the best Presidents of all time and find myself gaining more respect for him each and every time I hear him speak.

[WiseButAngrySara]

25. I agree 100%, and I would support him 100%. He did win in 2004. ....n/t

[livetohike]

10. Kerry's environmentalism is the main reason I voted for him and

any Dem. candidate in 2008 who is strong in this area will receive my support.

Thanks for spelling it out. :-)

[Sydnie]

12. I'm on board Will - If he wants to run, I will be there with him. n/t

[Vektor]

13. Agreed - I've met him, and myself and several DUers had the

"proverbial beer" with him last Dec., where we got to talk at length with him one on one, no pretense.

He is a stellar human being. He's warm, friendly, down to earth, a great listener, and completely accommodating. I firmly believe that in a 22 year history in the Senate, and a 35+ years long record of public service, that one or two votes I don't agree with, or one or two missteps along the way do not negate all the good things this man has done. He's a human being, and though a highly capable one, he's not perfect - he's human.

There is NO politician I agree with 100% on every issue, but I think Kerry, overall, is a great man.

Thanks for sharing your story, Will.

[phylny]

32. I voted for him, and I'd vote for him again. HOWEVER

he NEEDS to work with someone to learn how to make his speech clear, concise, and simple.

There were too many times that I heard him speak and his mode of communication is simply too formal and complicated for the average American.

[politicasista]

35. I think he is making progress in that area.

I saw C-SPAN's Road to the WH and he looked presidential. I hope he can just be himself, and let Teresa be Teresa. They are relaxed when they are this way.

[July]

45. I didn't see that.

I thought he spoke very well.

[sandnsea]

49. 49% understood him n/t

[Dr Ron]

50. He does vary

There is a considerable difference in his speaking style before different groups. His intelligence is apparent in his talks before more academic groups, and sometimes he wound up speaking over the heads of others when he forgot to tone it down a notch. I've also seen him do an excellent job many other times in communicating to the average American.

[phylny]

54. I agree with what you're saying. I'm not suggesting that he has to

(pardon the expression) dumb-down his message, but he has to be more succinct.

[Dr Ron]

55. Some days he got it, and some days he didn't

He did much better on some ocassions than others.

If we were choosing a President based purely on speaking ability, we could probably do better.

If choosing a President based upon the content of what he says, then I'd stick with Kerry

[phylny]

98. Yes, and for those who feel he's uppity, elitist, and doesn't speak

to the common man, perhaps a change can be made.

He has your vote and mine. But half the country voted for *.

[NMDemDist2]

16. I've never met the man but I emailed his Senate office in Aug 2002

to beg him to run.

I'd support him again in a heartbeat.

I'd support Al Gore again in a heartbeat.

The rest of the so called "front runners" ?? hmmmm not so much.

[druidity33]

73. i really think

Kerry/Gore or Gore/Kerry is a winning ticket... but would one of them want 2nd fiddle? Could they go Kerry/Gore in '08 then Gore/Kerry in'12 and then Kerry/Gore again in '16... theoretically that's possible right? On e can dream can't one?

[Dr Ron]

17. Good to hear from someone based upon experience

So much of what we hear about Kerry is based upon media stereotypes which those of us who have seen Kerry in small groups know is not true.

[karynnj]

18. If Kerry runs, I will definately vote for him

As the 2004 election came closer, everything I saw, hear or read about Kerry made me realise what an incredible President he would be. In addition to his intelligence and experience, his willingness to listen would have made him exception. His integrity and moral clarity, which would have been great in any time period but at that time it would have been exactly what was needed.

The President is not the country, but to many in the outside world the President will reflect the country. There is no other candidate who could have been as believable to the world saying that the US would reject things like Abu Ghraib and that we would conform to international law while he was President. The fact that he stood up as a 27 yr old to demand the government do comparable things would likely give him the believability that we need.

[babylonsister]

19. Thank you, Will, for taking the time to share this with us.

I think firsthand accounts and experiences are so important and help people to understand who they are dealing with. I happen to be a Kerry fan, which doesn't hurt, but you just reinforced my uninformed opinion. :toast:

[politicasista]

20. Kick and recommend

Thanks for sharing your story Will. :kick:

[Ksec]

21. Watch Kerry schmoozing a crowd..thats class.

I emulate him . I admire him greatly. I consider him my role model along with Wes Clark.

I believe he would be an extraordinary President because of his character,which is sterling.

[blm]

36. Kerry and Clark are my favorites in front of crowds, too. They both

have a certain elegance AND warmth, and when you add their obvious courage and intellect it gives me all the sizzle a woman could want.

[ohtransplant]

22. Excellent as always Mr. Pitt.

Senator Kerry impresses me as a real man of the people - rarity. I, like you, can't think of many others who has the ability to live and converse comfortably with everyman as well as Prime Ministers.

In New Hampshire this past weekend, I believe the Senator said himself, he's grown from the '04 experience, more focused and plain-spoken. He's certainly been fighting for us, the party and his state in the Senate in addition to working for Democratic candidates all over the country.

Does Kerry come with warts? Absolutely, but what candidate doesn't... Do I always agree with him? No, but the more I learn about him, the more I respect the guy. He's the real deal.

[WiseButAngrySara]

26. Wonderful Post Will; No flame suit required for me. I agree. K and R. n/t

[benny05]

27. Kerry is a good guy

FYI--Will, he supports Tammy Duckworth, who isn't the one you've been helping in Illinois.

[abbiehoff]

28. Thank you for this thread.

I've been a big fan of John Kerry since 1971, and still am.

I was sorry about the IWR vote, but I understand his reasoning at the time. I think he would be a great president and hope that he will be one day.

[ProSense]

29. Excellent insights. Thanks! n/t

[KoKo]

30. You are still DLC after all these years..

:-( Why don't you right now sign up as Kerry's campaign manager....

You are supposedly Progressive yet you constantly "look backward."

I know you don't care for my opinions...but I AM a PROGRESSIVE and I really can't get where you come from. You seem to "play both sides against the middle" for your own ends as to where you position yourself.

I don't have a problem with you being a young guy and needing to make a living but...I do with people who "prostrate their soul" for profit when it eats into their souls and will eventually cause them to have some bad stuff to deal with in their lives down the road.

I think well of you, Will, or I wouldn't bother with you....and YES...I know you can give a SHIT what I think so don't bother to hit me with a trash..because it's not necessary... I'm sending an "olive branch" here for both of us who agree to disagree...but I AM a PDA Member and Activist so I'm not "clueless" or some "keyboard warrior."

But, I can understand your reaction to "odious" people to you...still saying they have some deep regard for you because they think you have a "good heart" underneath it all.

Your "good heart" might not mesh with what many might think is required...but I've always believed that your "good side" will eventually have it's epiphany...and the "demons" will be dealt with.

:toast:

[blm]

34. Why don't you see anti-corruption Dems as being progressives?

When did corruption NOT matter to progressive voters?

Why isn't the best environmentalist record a progressive one to you?

Why isn't the Clean Elections bill a progressive's REAL campaign finance reform?

[Name removed]

37. Deleted sub-thread

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

[dsc]

38. With all due respect

I think any of the candidates we had running in 2008 could have handled the session with reporters. I realize Bush has radically lowered our expectations of politicians in regards to ability to communicate, but I can't think of a single person on our side who couldn't have done the same thing.

[Taverner]

39. I don't think Kerry is a Vichy dem

Hillary, Lieberman and many others are, however....

[KoKo]

53. Kerry is a VERY NICE GUY! Done great stuff on Environment....BUT!

He has "other issues."

I kinda like him...but as a "Progressive Dem" he just doesn't "SPEAK OUT" enough for the "radical" (not radical, anymore) causes him to seem very DLC COMPLIANT. :shrug:

I would like a more RADICAL/PROGRESSIVE VOICE than Kerry at this point.

But, I worked for Kerry and like him in MANY WAYS...but he seems to always "fall on his sword." :=)

[Malikshah]

41. Why? Are we back to Jan 2004 all over again???

Personal experiences are just that personal. Go for it. Enjoy. Buy the T-shirt.

Beyond that--it smacks of stirring the pot for whatever reason.

[WilliamPitt]

48. Mmmm.

OK.

Sorry I posted some thoughts in an open forum I've been a part of since May 2001.

Such a bastard I am.

:eyes:

[Malikshah]

56. Feel free to post-- feel free to be condescending

with the eyerolls-- It's a lovely dance that I remember so fondly from 2004.

In all seriousness though-- I take it you do know that personal encounters are one thing-- public actions are another. I take more stock in walking the walk in public in a consistent fashion.

Kerry, no doubt, has won your heart. I'm happy you have a candidate.

In the end, though, this is so strangely reminiscent of late 2003 and early 2004-- replete with little emoticons and quick one-liners.

I just couldn't let it pass. To quote Phil from NewsRadio..."Good times...good times"

[WilliamPitt]

58. I don't "have" a candidate

as was clearly stated. But Kerry's name has come up several times in the last few days, and each time the mention of his name has spurred attacks. I wanted to add something else to the conversation.

And if we're going to talk condescending, how about "Shouldn't this be posted in..." and "Is it 2004 again?" and "Aren't you stirring the pot..."?

Pot meet kettle.

[Malikshah]

72. Hmmmm....

And so it continues.

Is it 2004 again is a legitimate question based on my posts. If you wish to play the "who's swarthier" game, though...the Membership (since 2001) pissing contest beats me hands down.

Enjoy.

I look forward to the upcoming elections. No doubt the discourse will continue. My kevlar is affixed.

Have at ye! :)

[KoKo]

93. So...as a Spokesperson for PDA who is YOUR CANDIDATE?

A paid spokesperson should have "some" opinion? :shrug: No?

[WilliamPitt]

100. These are my candidates

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/olver.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/waters.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/cegelis-rally.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/conyers.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/criscenzo.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/lee.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/trupiano-endorse.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/watson.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/woolsey.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/young-primary.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/bonifaz.php

http://pdamerica.org/articles/campaigns/

If you actually went to the PDA site, you'd know this already.

[pitohui]

127. i thought it was a great post

i don't see the harm in posting personal stories, that is how we get insight after all?

[stepnw1f]

43. I Will Be Supporting Him

if he gets the nomination. I like the man...

[leftstreet]

44. What's his position on universal health care? Immigration reform?

Any Dem who doesn't have a plan on these two issues, will likely lose to a Repub. The "rabble" will just keep walking right on past the polls on election day until they hear someone speaking to their interests.

[JanusAscending]

178. He answered those questions on CSPAN, in Nashua N.H. this past weekend

plus about 8 more Democratic "stands" on specific issues, to show the naysayers that we Dems DO HAVE A BETTER PLAN for America.

[leftstreet]

179. So is he for national health care, or not?

What did he say?

:shrug:

Does he like Ted Kennedy's Medicare For All plan, or is he tending toward the VA system?

[JanusAscending]

183. He didn't specify which plan,(that I can recall)

but he spoke for the need for National Health care all through the Campaign. I know he is working on legislation to make sure that all children are covered. He has always said the plan that the Congress has for their health care was a good model for Americas' uninsured. Hope this helps. I'm sure you could find a transcript of his speech in N.H. on the John Kerry forum here on DU.

[incapsulated]

47. Well, I'm sure a lot of us could relay...

Some personal experience that is convincing evidence, to ourselves, of why "my guy" is so extraordinary.

Not sure what the point is, though.

You are loyal to Kerry. I respect that. :shrug:

(Shouldn't this be in the GDP?)

[bpilgrim]

51. When he spear heads BBV reform, i'll take a 2nd look...

until then i won't be able to trust him if he asks for my support again.

once bitten, twice shy

peace

[WilliamPitt]

52. And if no Dem spearheads BBV in 2008, will you sit the election out?

[bpilgrim]

57. uh, i have been fighting and pass'n the word for 5 years in my small way

why would i give up now or then?

our kids deserve better and in order to make sure they get what they deserve i will hold our reps feet to the fire, especially on BBV.

we as outsiders should be using our collective wit to hold the insiders to account and not gloss over their deficiencies.

peace

[WilliamPitt]

60. You didn't answer my question

[bpilgrim]

61. yes, i did... i will never surrender

hows that?

peace

[WilliamPitt]

68. Actually, you didn't

But I don't think it's worth it to try.

For the record, the question was, "If no Dem spearheads BBV, will you sit out the election?"

[bpilgrim]

75. nevermind

peace

[KoKo]

78. Do you have a link to Kerry's Stand on: VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT?

I've gotten the impression that Kerry thinks it's all "conspiracy nuts on the left" who are working for "VOTING REFORM" and VVPB...all over AMERICA.

I'm still waiting for KERRY and OTHERS to "SPEAK OUT ABOUT THIS."

And, for you, Will...Where do YOU STAND ON THIS??? :shrug:

I think you worked your butt off with MatCom of DU to spread the word about Gore being trashed...

So! Where ARE YOU THESE DAYS?? AND, WHERE IS PDA which I'm a member of and a DONATER to?

[WilliamPitt]

84. 'k...

I've gotten the impression that Kerry thinks it's all "conspiracy nuts on the left" who are working for "VOTING REFORM" and VVPB...all over AMERICA.

That's why he joined with Cobb, Badnarik and Bonifaz in all those lawsuits in Ohio...which are still ongoing, btw.

I'm still waiting for KERRY and OTHERS to "SPEAK OUT ABOUT THIS."

See above.

And, for you, Will...Where do YOU STAND ON THIS???

Stupid question.

I think you worked your butt off with MatCom of DU to spread the word about Gore being trashed...

Don't know what you are talking about here.

So! Where ARE YOU THESE DAYS?? AND, WHERE IS PDA which I'm a member of and a DONATER to?

www.pdamerica.org

You are a strange person.

[KoKo]

109. There's nothing on your PDA link about VVP Ballot so, Will,

where is their effort on this critical vote integrity issue affecting every state this spring due to the Pug's HAVA act buy of new machines. And down here in a red state, we are not aware of Kerry working to assure that we get auditable, recountable machines. Remember, "we will count every vote" ...hope this time that it counts.

[blm]

105. Actually, I'm with bpilgrim on this - the ONLY Dem who CAN win is the one

who deals with the electronic voting machines FIRST. I'd like to see the DNC work to expose the GOP control of the media and the voting machines and do it for ALL Dems and mostly FOR this country.

[KoKo]

114. I've not seen Will as a Rep of PDA take a stand on this, though...but

I DO KNOW that Will fought hard for Gore vote to be acknowleged. I think after that as all young folks do...he had to go where he could make a living.

I don't blame him for that...I just "chide" him so that he doesn't go too far to the DLC..

:shrug:

[bpilgrim]

131. *faint*

:P

i can not understand why our leaders aren't front & center on this after everything we have uncovered over the years :shrug:

i think us outsiders need to apply more pressure :evilgrin:

:hi: blm

peace

[KittyWampus]

59. Kerry is our best chance to "stop Hillary" if she is thinking of running

and that's a big "if".

[KoKo]

95. Hey...even if one doesn't "like" Hillary..she will FIGHT FOR Pro-CHOICE

to the DEATH....

So, there is MUCH to be said for her. And...besides...the Repugs and Matthews just love to push her as the Frontrunner.

If we get Hillary "In" it's amazing the PULL we LEFTIES will have to SHAPE POLICY!!!!

That's my "pragmatic side, speaking here."

Hillary is NOT my candidate but she might do GREAT THINGS for "Progessive Movement" ..."if" she were elected...No? :shrug:

[pitohui]

129. well not all wish to stop hillary

they would both be fine presidents

there is an embarrassment of riches as far as the talent available to us

[undeterred]

63. thanks for sharing those experiences

Its consistent with what people said about Kerry as a jury foreman- cordial to everyone, took the job seriously, a born leader. :patriot:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

66. kerry has a very good record...and mostly i agree with him on

i will not lynch a good candidate for one wrong vote

[Just Me]

70. In my opinion, Kerry is an ideal leader.

He WEIGHS matters. He sincerely holds all Americans' interests at heart. He has a wide array of experience, the kind of diverse exposure that builds wisdom. He is an advocate for justice and adherent to the rule of law. He is borderline brilliant. He is actually compassionate. He is courageous and morally centered.

He is like, the total opposite of junior.

I'd support him in a heartbeat.

[rug]

81. All well and good but

you didn't tell us whether Franken's paper is over or under.

[Rex]

83. I will support Kerry if he is the man picked.

nt

[kohodog]

88. Why Not Gore? He's lost his handlers and is making sense

If I'm going to give someone a second chance, I think it will be Al. But while the jury is out on him (for me), JK has a long way to go to win my vote. His most disappointing moment for me was after the election when he exited without any discussion about verified (paper) ballots.

[WilliamPitt]

90. Well, since I never met him

a post about my personal experiences would be fiction.

Do people willingly miss the line where I say, in perfectly clear English, that I am not necessarily supporting Kerry in the primaries becxause others may be better?

[annabanana]

97. you suffer the curse

of the high profile...

doomed to mis-characterization.

[DanCa]

92. well....

Well you know, I firmly believe that most - not all - of the Kerry 08 nay sayers are the ones that didn't vote for him in 04. I still can't believe that people would perfer the Chimps Judicial picks over any one or two issues that they had with the Senator. Some people just can't accept it that voting for third party this time put the Chimp back in the white house so they bash Democrats and Senator kerry at every chance they get. At least that's my take on things.

[incapsulated]

94. Huh?

Because someone doesn't want Kerry again in 2008 means that they didn't vote for him in the general of 2004?

[DanCa]

101. I said some not all (nt)

[incapsulated]

104. You said "most"

So most people who don't want Kerry in 2008 as the nominee, are third party moles or something? What are you on? MOST people on DU supported someone other than Kerry in the primaries, why are you surprised that they would want someone else the next time, too?

[DanCa]

121. Senator Kerry wasn't my first choice either ...

I sucked up the loss and voted for the Senator because I didn't want the chimp to get his paws on the Supreme Court. Are people third party moles certainly not. People can and do have the right to vote for whomever they wish too, however, all things have consequences. And in this case not voting for the Good Senator was what helped to get the chimp in the White House.
Of course you can disagree with me you have that right too.

[incapsulated]

143. I'm honestly confused, here

It seems to me you were saying that if I didn't want Kerry as the 2008 nominee, that I probably didn't vote for him in the GENERAL ELECTION in 2004. Which doesn't make any sense. Like I said, most of us supported someone else in the primary, but we voted for Kerry when he was the nominee. Just as most of us will suck it up if our guy or gal doesn't win the next time.

[ruggerson]

102. The question is not whether he would make a magnificent President

I agree with you, I think he would.

But, would he make a magnificent campaigner? Last time around, he was pretty darn miserable.

And you don't get to be President in this country unless you're also a good politician.

I listened to his speech over the weekend up in NH, and I'm not sure I see much difference in his campaign style.

If he wins the nomination, he would also have my vote, but does he have the balls to the wall skills to actually win?

[pitohui]

133. he was terrific in the debates

and his wife theresa was terrific also in the campaign

i don't know, i think he ran an impressive campaign (may be in the minority of this belief) but we have a media constantly against us piling on the crap

[JanusAscending]

176. Why don't you ask the "guys" in NAM ,

who he chased up onto the land with his Swift boat in hot pursuit, if he has "the balls to the walls skills to win"???? DC, forever a Kerry supporter!

[Inspired]

103. I loved the Kerry/Edwards ticket

The sunshine boys...remember? What the fuck happened? I'll never understand.

[JanusAscending]

177. Dear Inspired,

THEY WON !! Bush and Rove rigged the election! Where have you been for the past ungodly year? Understand yet??

[senseandsensibility]

106. He apologized for his IWR vote?

On the record in Al Franken's apartment? In 2003? Was he quoted? I feel like I'm missing something here. It wouldn't be the first time. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading your description of the event and his ability to handle such a crowd doesn't surprise me in the least. Remember the debates? I try not to. To think that we could have had that man, even with his obvious flaws, instead of the walking disaster we have now....

[Name removed]

108. Deleted sub-thread

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

[pitohui]

116. well i'd support him too, as i recall i DID support him

be that as it may, the past is past, and we need to look toward the future not the past

doesn't seem likely people will go w. a proven loser when the option is to try someone else

i do think president kerry has a nice ring to it and he'd do a great job but i think we have a LOT of talent in this party and quite frankly it seems only fair to give someone else their shot

not a flame just a rambling thought really

[mzmolly]

120. Will, respectfully Kerry was the only presidential candidate invited to

the sworay.

I like JK, and I'd gladly support him again if he gets the nomination - but I don't think he's going to be our guy in 08. Were going for a successful southern white male governor with some sort of national security experience - if we're smart. ;)

[WilliamPitt]

123. He wasn't invited

He arranged it himself.

[mzmolly]

126. Ahh, very interesting.

Thanks for the correction. I thought I'd heard otherwise initially?

:hi:

[blm]

155. At that time no media would cover Kerry as they had proclaimed his

candidacy dead months earlier. Kerry held this grilling and most of the attendees STILL didn't report it afterwards. A few did.

[mzmolly]

158. Well it was a smart move on his part in hind site.

:hi:

[KoKo]

135. I hope they ALL RUN!

just saying.......and that there's something there for all of us...just like the last time they all ran.....

But, to be pushed into '08 when we need to focus on '06 ..sort of makes me think we've all locked into Chris Matthews "Tweety Bird" THINK SPEAK!!!!

:puke:

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

136. WOW! I envy you for those experiences...

... in particular the first one. What a group. There are many people on that list that I admire: I don't admire the rest (yet) because I hadn't discovered them until now. Thanks for the reading list.

Mr. Pitt, your passion is admirable, as are your writing talents. Your judgment is usually sound. I enjoy reading much of your work. Sure, your passion sometimes overtakes you (e.g., I recall reading an hilariously cock-eyed thread that you started about "anarchy"), but that just proves you are human. The following statement from your OP, however, is pure disingenuous bullshit:

My purpose for this post isn't to try and talk anyone out of their opinions of the man, or to convince them that those opinions are wrong.

Please... this isn't your diary. You had a point in posting this and it wasn't just "Hey, guess what happened to me a few years ago" nor name-dropping.

Sen. Kerry seems to be a very, very good man. He was, and will always be, an order of magnitude above GWB regardless of the metric used. As an outside observer of your 2004 election, I was stunned by what happened. I can't even imagine how it felt for those of you closer to the core. Maybe that's why I don't understand the in-fighting.

In summary, I truly did enjoy reading your post, but felt that you were masking yourself. That's all. Amateur psycho-analysis isn't my thing.

PS: I hope that people resist the temptation to aim high in Mr. Franken's bathroom, but I would understand it if they didn't.

[WilliamPitt]

154. Let's see

Find for me one single post in this whole thread where I argue against someone who doesn't like Kerry about their dislike. To wit, find me one post where I try to convince someone they are wrong regarding their specific or general beef.

My point was just what it was: a personal reflection on experiences meant to add to the recent Kerry-oriented conversations around here.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

163. Of course I can't...

Find for me one single post in this whole thread where I argue against someone who doesn't like Kerry about their dislike. To wit, find me one post where I try to convince someone they are wrong regarding their specific or general beef.

...because you haven't been that overt or aggressive. You didn't choose a method as crude as that, but your chosen method doesn't hide your real purpose.

My point was just what it was: a personal reflection on experiences meant to add to the recent Kerry-oriented conversations around here.

Like I said, it was a great reflection and I thank you for sharing it. I just challenge the cotton wadding you used when outlining your "purpose" and your phrase "add to the recent Kerry-oriented conversations around here" just adds more padding. Now you are challenging me to find an overt attack when there clearly isn't one. This is starting to sound like something a speech-writer or press-secretary would pen.

I found your entire OP was a thinly-veiled challenge to the DU people who don't like Kerry. A well-written, yet passive, one; but a challenge nonetheless. I was dismayed that you tried to frame it as something more neutral. Look, I'm not trying to crap on your thread and I'm not a Kerry-hater. I'm not even American. You may find this hard to believe, but I'm a fan of much of your work. I was just trying to express my feelings as clearly as possible. If I failed, I will claim it's because I am not a writer.*

*See, I can can do it too.

[WilliamPitt]

171. Thoughts and opinions people disagree with

will indeed seem challenging to them. That's unavoidable. So I guess, in the most elemental sense, I am guilty as charged. :)

Thanks. Sorry if I sounded snarky above. I've had fifty people today either question my motives, challenge my progressive credentials, or do psychoanalysis of me based upon family history. I'm a little too easy to annoy today.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

200. That's cool. I apologise for MY snarkiness...

... thanks for not reacting to it.

[TayTay]

139. Cheesuz Will, you're from Boston or functionally so anyway

How the hell do you get through these long, strange, argumentative threads without ever once uttering the phrase:

'Bite me. Just bite me.'

I can't do it. What is the secret?

[Dr Ron]

142. I believe he has, just in a more polite form n/t

[WilliamPitt]

144. Scotch

:)

[KoKo]

147. Wading through all those links you gave me to read to support your

position...SCOTCH might be needed but then "me eyes" would spin in me head....so I gotta sip my "wine" to go and parse to see what you gave me.

Peace, and goodnight with my reams of Pitt Links....I have a night of reading.

:-)'s

koko...the "strange one" who does actually read..........

[FlemingsGhost]

141. It ain't worth much. In fact, you are fool, Will Pitt. (n/t)

Flem.

[WilliamPitt]

145. And to screwing all thems grammar rules and thing

:P

[FlemingsGhost]

150. A fool thinks "elections" are how fascists are driven from power

Still talking elections (and the usual suspects,) I see.

How quaint ... a true believer.

[sendero]

149. I have no doubt..

... that Kerry is a genuinely nice person, a man of integrity even.

But he's not the right person to be our standard-bearer in 2008, and no number of heart-warming anecdotes will make him so.

[dorkulon]

152. I think I have the perfect slogan, Will. (pic)

from The BEAST

[FrenchieCat]

156. Thanks. Now at least I know why he got great press after December.....

of 2003...in the middle of the primaries. January was Dean's demise via the press. Makes sense.

[WilliamPitt]

157. He earned it

[FrenchieCat]

166. well he did win the nomination!

[TayTay]

159. Ahm, you mean the same press that was ready to write

Kerry's obit? Ahm, I think Kerry was all but dead and buried by the press in Dec. I sincerely doubt that the journalists mentioned in the OP could have single-handedly convinced the voters in Iowa to change their minds like they did.

We have an Iowa caucus voter who responded to this thread. Nowhere in that response did he indicate that the press coverage made him change his mind or that Al Franken made him 'do it.' Ahm, there is no backup for this.

Besides, if I read this correctly, the OP didn't say, 'Vote for Kerry.' It seems to me it said, 'I don't hate him and if he ever ran again, I'd consider him. He's a good Dem and a good guy.' Ahm, shit, that seems fair and open-minded. I don't think it's a campaign poster though.

[wisteria]

162. This is a wonderful post. It proves what I have always felt about

Senator Kerry and that is that he wants to be President for all the right reasons. He truly does love America and wants to see it prosper and grow and remain respected in the world. Senator Kerry will have my support in the primary and hopefully the general election if he chooses to run again. I to think he would make an excellent President.

[pacalo]

164. Thanks for the interesting personal accounts, Will.

Considering the boy king's approval ratings, which have been consistently low since the 2004 election, nothing will convince me otherwise that Kerry lost that election. If the pope had run against the boy king & won, Diebold would have been prepared to show a victory for the boy king.

Diebold, your slip is showing, & the boy king's poll numbers is magnifying the view.

[LeahD]

165. Pro-Kerry threads often sink rapidly around here.

I'm surprised this one has been nominated so many times.
Thanks, Mr. Pitt, for giving us a glimpse of the man.
And I'd vote for him again. He was robbed!
Kicked and Nominated!

[Laurab]

168. Nice post Will

Nominated, even though there's an awful lot of....gibberish to wade through in the responses. I don't know how I'd handle it if I had people psychoanalyzing me, telling me about my childhood, telling me why I write what I write, putting words in my mouth (or in my post I guess), in a public forum, but I guess that's the price you pay for being well known. You post was quite clear to me, btw.

I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion about John Kerry, who I think would have made an excellent President. I'm kind of hoping he gets another chance, and we get to see the tougher and smarter REAL Kerry run. If someone who has a better chance comes along, then that's fine, too, but I've never changed my opinion of Kerry, and would back him without hesitation if he were to win the nomination. He would be one hell of a good President IMO.

[WilliamPitt]

169. Aw, shucks

It's just the Southern coming out in me.

;)

[eridani]

170. Sure he'd have made a better president than Bush

Not trying to damn with faint praise either. The fact remains that Kerry and all the other candidates (Kucinich and Sharpton excepted) were and are foursquare behind the expensive and wasteful project of continuing on as an imperial power, which will utterly destroy us economically if we don't give it up. The British and the Soviets had to for reasons of expense, and we will as well, like it or not. The following is what US foreign policy has been about since 1948.

http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/nsc68.htm#Kennan

We have about 50% of the world's wealth, but only 6.3% of its population....In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity....To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives....

We should cease to talk about vague and...unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

This was an explicit decision to take over the British position in the world, as explained earlier by Winston Churchill--

http://www.onpower.org/quotes/c.html

We are not a young people with an innocent record and a scanty inheritance. we have engrossed to ourselves . . . an altogether disproportionate share of the wealth and traffic of the world. We have got all we want in territory, and our claim to be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less reasonable to others than to us.

If you have any indication that Kerry doesn't buy the above, please let us know. (Why didn't any of the heavy hitters at Franken's place ask what Kerry thought of the PNAC?) It may very well be true that at the present we can't elect a president who will be both FDR and Gorbachev for us. If not, at least having one who is truly and passionately committed to inventing the renewable economy will help us with one of the preconditions for giving up imperialism.

[upi402]

172. can't we find a *new* SKULL AND BONESman?

:shrug:

[Clarkie1]

180. I'd prefer a non-ivy leaguer. Too much elitism in American politics. n/t

[politicasista]

181. Thanks for the productive Rovian talking points

At a time when we have a criminal, incompetent, lame duck president, doesn't eating you own and spewing RW talking points get tiring? Your Anti-Kerry bias is obvious.

[Clarkie1]

So calling * part of the politically elite would be a Rovian talking point

as well, I presume?

I'm not anti-Kerry; I'm anti-politically elite.

[Clarkie1]

190. So calling * part of the politically elite would be a Rovian talking point

as well, I presume?

I'm not anti-Kerry; I'm anti-politically elite.

[upi402]

182. Soft fingers make poor policy

:hi:

[Clarkie1]

191. That's a good way to sum it up as well. n/t

[LittleClarkie]

213. What EXACTLY in the name of Art Bell does that have to do with anything?

I mean really.

[Bread and Circus]

185. Well, my sense is that Kerry is a phony and you are just fooled by him

If this post were about Al Gore being an "at the core" good person, then I'd buy what you are saying. On the other hand I don't think Kerry is evil, a stooge, or any of that. However, he is just a politician and it seems like you've been taken in by a politician's charm.

[Name removed]

197. Deleted message

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

[bpilgrim]

207. look whos talkin

:eyes:

peace

[blm]

216. Nixon White House pushed the word "phony" in the press against Kerry.

Reagan and Bush WH did the same thing when he was uncovering their crimes in IranContra and BCCI.

Funny, how those long planted attacks on Kerry still live because they fit media storylines now, and distract from the EXTENSIVE record of actual work that Kerry has done to expose government corruption at its worst.

[mdmc]

186. if I had this kind of access to him, I would support him too.

On Sunday, I watched in in Nashua (spelling) (c-span Road to the White House). He bored me to tears, with the possible exception to his LSAT style "Brownie is to Katrina, like Cheney is to gun safety" shtick. 'Heckuva job, Brownie' didn't even roll off his tongue - it seemed forced (as if he had never called anyone by anything other then a formal name - like he never used a nickname).

I'm gonna be a Gore guy in the primary, if the landscape continues to develop the way it currently is. I will vote for Hillary, Zell Miller, Joementum, Kerry... whoever wins the nomination.

Unless, of course, the Dems grow a set of progressive balls. <-If this is the case, I will be with the progressives!

[Mass]

204. Not me - He was fine and people were happy to see him and talk

to him, which is what matters in meetings like this one.

Comparing Zell Miller to Kerry is a little extreme too, but once again, it may be because you dont know anything about him.

[mdmc]

209. zell is the easiest way to show my yellowdoggieness in 2008

what I mean is that I am going to vote for the nominated dem, even if it is Zell. IMO, there are very few dems more qualified then John Kerry to be president. John Kerry is one of the best that we have.

[LittleClarkie]

212. I liked the ease with which he worked the crowds after

I caught the end of the speech. He seemed to be rolling right along pretty well, with the crowd clapping after each of his points at the end.

But then I watched him go a'shmoozin' afterwards, and he was very relaxed and appeared to be well recieved.

I remember right after he'd synched the nomination, I caught him on CSPAN. I was still a vague Clarkie at that point. THEN he bored me to tears. I continued to be fairly bored until September 2004 when he suddenly kicked it into high gear and developed rhetoric. He'd done nothing but improve since then.

I don't get talking about waiting for a progressive as if Kerry isn't one. That's why the DLC treats him like a red-headed step child. He's too progressive for them. All it takes is one gander at his overall record over at www.vote-smart.org to see that. I've never understood people who lump him with Hillary and Lieberman. He's closer to Dean and Clark near as I can tell. Always seems to me to be a form of mental laziness, as if some folks hadn't looked all that closely. I grant you, sometimes you have to take a good hard look to "get" him. He's the sort of person who grows on ye. He surely grew on me.

The people in the Kerry group have also met him and found him to be very personable. So he might be someone who's easier to get to know on a one on one basis. I dunno. I wasn't so lucky. But it's funny our friend here mentions Gore, as he used to be considered quite stiff and boring. He's over that now. WAY over that. And so, near as I can tell, is Kerry.

[Ron Mexico]

196. I agree with the second half, but as for the first

I refuse to believe that the ability to answer questions for three hours makes him something special. If he were incapable of it, I'd really worry about trusting the office to the man.

Further, although I mean no offense, your "I am not sure I would support him in the primaries, simply because I do not know who else will be running. But if he gets the nomination, he will have 100% of my support and energy" is relatively meaningless to me unless he's running against another Democrat and the Repugs don't nominate anyone. I'd support anyone over a Repug.

Kerry crushed a complete dullard in three debates and still lost to the moron. Ohio or not, if he were a decent candidate he'd have crushed the festering turd he was running against (note that I'm not saying that he'd be a bad president, I'm saying he was a lousy candidate). Now he has to run with a loss on his record in a country where people aren't nearly politically aware / connected enough to take a piss in Franken's bathroom.

Sorry, but give me a Dem who has a chance to win. After what I saw in 2004, I'm not sure Kerry could have beaten Dole, for fuck's sake.

[WildEyedLiberal]

198. WTF

You think because DU hated Bush, that everyone did?

Cluestick for you, buddy - half the country in 2004 thought Bush was a strong, resolute leader, and they were told that EVERY SINGLE DAY by the corporate media.

You need to seriously get out of your left-wing bubble and realize that *gasp* most Americans don't see the world the way you do.

[Ron Mexico]

199. I have never run into anyone, ANYONE, who

liked Bush or thought he was a "strong, resolute leader" - especially after that bullshit carrier landing. I see 2004 as a year when people picked the guy they disliked least, not liked more. If you have a different opinion, more power to you, but I want someone who can beat the next Republican challenger and I have NO reason to believe Kerry can do it.

[blm]

215. Name one man to man matchup that Kerry lost to Bush.

You blame Kerry for an unorganized Dem party that had been weakened since 1997. Dem spokepeople SUCKED as they were only schooled for years in defending Clinton and were clueless about any other Dem's positions or record.

You had Dem figures saying Tora Bora was a success for Bush.

You had Clinton siding with Bush every time he got on CNN.

Media gave just 3 hrs to Dem convention for people to learn about Kerry, then gave 1 of those precious hours to Clinton. To jar your memory - Clinton was given NINE HOURS of coverage by all the networks in 92.

That matters.

Media also refused to cover Kerry's attack on the swiftliars in his August speech to the Firefighters Convention.

The leftleaning media and pundits got their asses kicked on a daily basis, because they couldn't tell the truth with the same emphasis and conviction that the RW media machine lied and covered up for Bush.

It's easy to point at just Kerry, isn't it, but be honest, has there ever been a president who has been protected by mass media more than Bush?

Kerry was a star quarterback stuck behind one of the weakest front lines in all of football.

[mtnsnake]

201. Kerry is great on the environment, but his chances are next to nil

that he'll be our candidate in 2008, IMO. I honestly think he'll finish 4th or 5th behind people like Edwards, Clark, Clinton, and Warner. He's a fine Senator, a good man, a legitimate war hero, a Godsend for the environment, but a less than mediocre campaigner who had his chance and blew it.

With such an impressive environmental track record under his belt, one can only wonder why he used it to such little advantage during the campaign. It was one of his strongest points, yet it was mentioned so very infrequently. If by some miracle he does becomes our candidate again, I hope to heck he flaunts his record on the environment a little more than he did in 2004.

I don't think anyone has to worry about Kerry having our full support, though, if he does find a way to get through the primaries. I hope everyone will support him or whoever it is that gets the Democratic nod.

[LWolf]

205. I went along in '04.

I appreciate Senator Kerry's strengths, and his positive efforts in Congress. While I never warmed to him as a presidential candidate, I donated and did my bit after the convention in '04. Even after the pro-war flavor of the convention, and the removal of Medea Benjamin, left me feeling "ignored."

Not again. I'm not doing it all over again in '08. I'm not making any decisions until the primary season begins, and I see what I really get to choose from. I don't see Kerry on my list of potential receivers of my vote at this point.

[bridgit]

206. my biggest issue with Kerry is that he offers a stationary target...

is far too august from within his silver tongued verbiage, and needs to understand the opposition as petty to a fault (treat them as such), insufferably pissy as a first response & likely to say virtually anything to WIN!

[leesa]

210. So why does he not state for the record in the Senate that the war was

illegal. Why does he not state for the Senate record that Bush's actions are illegal....what's with all the hemming, hawing and bullshitting around while our country goes down the corporate drain?

Yada..Yada...Yada...

[tavalon]

211. Those are really great personal stories

and if they were mine, I would likely have the same opinion. My memory, however, is of the morning after the election - me, on the little pink barge, screaming with rage, tearing up every campaign poster I had and knowing that, for the first time ever, I could be homocidal. I've let go of the rage but not the feeling of betrayal. Give me a decade or two. At least I no longer spit on the ground when his name is mentioned. That's progress.

[BooScout]

214. He won't get my support....

He won't stand up when it counts. He voted for war, he won't publically support a censure of Bush, he had his chance and now it's someone else's time.

[Name removed]

217. Deleted message

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

[LSK]

218. Will, is this your original post of when you were with Kerry in NH ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4305&mesg_id=4305