Occupy Boston people demonstrating at JK's Boston Residence..

[ObamaKerryDem]

What are your thoughts on this?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU5oPLE9SGw&feature=share

Personally, I think their efforts would be better focused on such protest at Brown's residence as JK already has demonstrated that he gets it (though to be fair, this seems to have occured before JK's statements regarding the OWS movement but still-his record and actions show that he gets it..).

[Luftmensch067]

1. I imagine it's evidence of respect in a strange way

Acknowledgement that JK is the "real" senator, the one with influence and power, the one they'll get the most attention for if they focus their protest on him. Also, they specifically say in the video that it's because he's on the supercommittee. I agree that they should know that he's not their problem, Brown is, but this particular band of protesters is not one I feel warmly towards -- their chant of "___ Kerry is scary when he doesn't represent us" is just plain stupid. And I could swear that some of them start out calling him "President Kerry"! Not that I object to that idea. :-) But they seem kind of dopey and clueless to me.

[Mass]

2. He is in the super committee, so this makes sense. He also has had in the past

words that are not necessarily clear concerning Social Security and his position on trade deals may be troublesome to some, as his previous support for hedge funds managers paying 15% taxes (not sure where he stands on that). And he is part of the 1%.

Personally, I feel uncomfortable with Kerry voting for the Columbia Trade Deal. I think the criticism for South Korea is overblown as South Korea has about the same level of life as the US, but there are serious issues with Columbia.

As long as the protest was respectful, as it seems to be from the beginning of the clip, I do not see any issue with it. And he lives in Boston, so it is easy to access.

I have no problem with people asking for accountability. My only complaint is that these people seem to ask for accountability for some, but to ignore it for others.

[karynnj]

3. I suspect that that see the possibility of getting Kerry as a powerful advocate

who could fight for them. Kerry IS on the super committee. The fact though is that Kerry really does not have the power to do what even Obama can't. It is particularly absurd to yell at Kerry that he "has to do something on climate change". What the hell do they think that he worked on harder than anyone last year?

I also have a huge problem with radicals ON EITHER SIDE that she compromise as evil - and inflexibility as a virtue. Now, I disagree with unilateral compromise, but the fact is that ANY proposal needs to be compared to the status quo (or to what will happen if there is no compromise).

The fact is that I don't think there are many legislators that the OWS approves of. I think Kerry understands this from his own protests. He said some pretty strong things to the Senators of 1971 - every bit as strong as what these people are saying. Like Kerry then, they had reached a point where they were speaking against intolerable situations. There were many on the SFRC who had been "better" on Vietnam - as Kerry is to most on the banks/income inequality etc. Yet, Kerry took his comments to them - far more publicly than these demonstrators. He also did not preface his comments on leaders who abandoned the vets by excluding those he was speaking to. It might have been that speaking to those with the most power AND who had some of the best records on the issue was done because they were the most likely to actually be moved (or troubled) by the truths he spoke.

Here, Kerry is powerful. Kerry's record is that of a social justice Catholic - and he should be more sympathetic to their calls than most. I trust that Kerry will aim to do what he thinks is best for the country, but I don't expect everyone to have that trust. In 2005 or 2006, in a Daily Kos diary, it was mentioned that Kerry spoke of the need for people to lobby their Senators on issues they cared about and spoke of how very few people spoke to him about Iraq. It is good that they are petitioning him on the issue.

That said, it would have been better to go to his office. Finally the Scary Kerry chant needs to go as it reeks of the same juvenile rhyme used by the RW. On the vast majority of votes, Kerry is voting exactly as they want.

As to why not Brown:
- They likely do not see flipping him as possible - making it a waste of time.
- He does not have the power Kerry does
- They likely see that Kerry will listen and to care about the concerns they raise.

[ObamaKerryDem]

4. You've made some really great points here, karynnj..

..I think JK would/most likely is more understanding of movements like this than perhaps most other politicians are because, as you pointed out, he started out as an activist himself and likely still is at heart (I think his actions and record back that up in many ways..). The only real problem I have with this (other than protesting at his personal residence--it does seem like his Boston office would be a better choice..) is the "Scary Kerry" crap--sounds just like the Freeper crowd. I wish some of these Progresssive protesters (and I say this as a proud Progressive myself) wouldn't say things like that--it definitely puts them into "same coin, different side" territory. We don't need our own version of the Tea Party, imho. That's the last thing we need, actually.

Occupy the streets AND the voting booths is what I say! ;)

Of course, the "Scary Kerry" crowd is probably only a small, fringe-ier element of the OWS/Occupy Boston crowd, but it's unfortunate, IMO. I also think your assessment of JK's record as that of a social justice Catholic is right on. I just wish more of these folks would look at the FACTS when it comes to JK and his record and not parrot, however inadvertantly, RW talking points..

I think many if not most of the people in this movement likely do respect JK and probably have more faith that he will do the right thing than Brown and it is encouraging, the way you and Luftmensch framed this is more encouraging than it seemed at first. I just don't like that element of it, though I guess it's inevitable in most any group situation, that you'll have a few "bad apples". :)