Charley on the MTA: The first question, I know you answered it outside, is about the campaign funds and Barney Frank gave up his 30% and Marty Meehan obviously has not yet, Ed Markey has not yet, so –
JK: Well, I’ve been, I’ve done more than 30[%]. I’ve raised more money than I have, and given it away. Other people have been out raising money for themselves. I’m not raising money for myself. I’ve only raised money for other candidates. I’ve spent down on the money that we have in order to have the staff to go out to help other people. I mean, we’ve been exclusively in the business of trying to help people around the country – I might add, 180 candidates in states most of which have nothing to do with presidential politics ’cause they’re not on the calender. So I’m not, you know, I’ve nothing to be sort of second-guessing here. I’m proud of what we have done. I gave, you know, up front, early. A million dollars we wrote to the DSCC. A million dollars to the DNC. I gave 500 000 to the DCCC. I put 250 000 into the state of Washington to help Christine Gregoire have a recount when it mattered. And so, we’re raising money, we’ve continued to raise money, we’ve written checks, we’ve helped people, and we continue to do that.
Charley: And yet, I mean, of course –
JK: Well, some of the money –
Charley: people see that pot of money and they think, “Well, gosh…”
JK: But we don’t have that pot of money. Because we’ve been spending down on that to be able to help people. That’s number one. Number two, we also have an audit going on, which is a traditional part of any presidential race. We have exposure to, you know, whatever that audit decides. And you can’t, you know, be reckless and stupid about giving it away. So we did the next best thing, which is put all of our energy into helping people around the country. I raised a quarter of Tammy Duckworth’s money for her primary campaign. I raised the entire Get Out the Vote money for Jim Webb to help win the primary. I mean, we’ve been out there fighting, I think, you know, as effectively as anybody, and I’m not going to, you know, be somehow put on the defensive about an effort we made that I think has been second to nobody in the history of the party.
RevDeb: I wouldn’t presume to put you on the defensive. I think the reason that the netroots are really excited about this is the fact that there are so many races now in play that weren’t before, and we’re trying to find out how anybody can come to the fore and chip in and get us over that hump.
JK: That’s exactly what I’m doing. Today we went out and, to back it up, Teresa and I are personally putting thousands of dollars of personal money in to help people. So we’re backing it up.
RevDeb. Okay. This is an opportunity we may not ever see again, at least not in my lifetime.
JK: Well, don’t be pessimistic. On the contrary. We’re going to see it, because these guys are wrong. Because they’re taking the country in the wrong direction. And we’re going to continue to fight and be in their face on this stuff. I’m very confident we’re going to see big changes coming up. Timing is everything. We were a little ahead of the curve in ’04. You know, you were one year out from the election, it was hard incumbent president in a time of war. But I think, now, people see the war was a lie. Now people see they lied about social security. Now they see that they lied about North Korea. I mean, everything! And therefore, it’s bubbling up. And I think it’s going to continue, because these guys have mismanaged America for six years.
Charley: What are you looking forward to doing if the Democrats get ahold of the Senate?
JK: Well, I think any number of things. I mean, one of the first things we ought to do is make sure everybody can vote properly, so that in ’08 there are no problems, period. And I think that would be one of the top priorities we ought to address. Obviously we ought to address the minimum wage. We ought to address health care, we ought to address, you know, try to fix No Child Left Behind, fund it properly. Fix the budget. I mean, there’s a lot. I don’t think there’s one choice these guys have made either the House or the Senate, because, sometimes, there’s been a slight difference in them where there isn’t just a profound difference between us about what the priorities of the country are. I mean, you look at what they did on immigration in the House, you look at what they’ve done on the tax breaks they gave away, what they did to the energy bill, the drug bill, the bankruptcy bill….
RevDeb: Across the board.
JK: Across the board. Every choice, we have a better choice. And if we take over one house or the other, both houses will be empowered by that, because nothing can happen without the consent of that one house. All of a sudden, you have a negotiation you didn’t have before.
RevDeb: The message that I got from John is that you were interested in hearing from us, and I’m kind of curious about that. Why were we called to say, “Please come and see us.”
JK: Because you guys are, I think, very important to the communication structure of America now. I think you’re on a cutting edge communications transformation that’s taking place. And I think, for those of us in public life, if we’re going to be effective, as well as knowledgeable, we’d better listen, and we’d better be in touch.
RevDeb: So what do you want?
JK: Well, I want to know what you’re feeling, what you’re thinking. What’s the, you know, where do you find the most effective portals for reaching people at this point in time? Because they’re shifting, in a way. I mean, I noticed that, you know, television news is down.
RevDeb: Olbermann’s going up.
JK: Thank God. I’m glad to see him going up. I think he’s going up because he’s saying something. But I think that where people are getting their news is changing. Am I wrong?
RevDeb: I don’t know. I know that there –
Charly: We don’t know what we’re doing, is the thing. I think that’s the thing people don’t understand about bloggers, and about the relationship with politicians and the press, is that actually, we’re just throwing this stuff out there and seeing if it sticks. So, I, I mean, we’ve been asked, we’ve gotten some press attention. People ask us, “Well, what kind of effect are you having?”
RevDeb: We don’t know.
Charley: The fact is, we don’t know.
JK: Well, I think you are having an effect. I mean, I’ll tell you from my point of view, I think that, whenever anybody’s able to communicate with people, and it has some kind of networking impact, I think it’s positive. I mean, I’ve always believed in that. That’s the way we tried to do the grassroots movements of the 1960s. It was networking communications. But we had more limited means of reaching people than we do today. Now you have this spontaneous combustion that’s very exciting, I think.
RevDeb: How do you see our relationship going forward?
JK: That’s up to you folks, I guess. Probably not dissimilar to the relationship we have with the mainstream media. We sit and we talk, we work, we try to get information to you, we try to give you a point of view that, hopefully, you’ll reflect, because it’s based on the truth. I mean, it seems to me that truth is the real foundation of any kind of communication. And so, if we’re standing for it and fighting for it, we hope you’ll help us get it out there. If we’re not, than you should kick us.
RevDeb: We’re trying like hell to get the i
nformation out about the Lieberman campaign. And –
JK: I’m going down there. Tomorrow.
RevDeb: I know you are, and I’m really glad you’re doing that. I’m really, I cannot for the life of me understand how there’s a cluster of Democrats that are sitting this one out, Democratic Senators. Or, that are backing Lieberman, because, in my from what I see, we have one of your colleagues who’s going to hold the rest of you hostage for the forseeable future. And it just seems like an untenable position to me.
JK: Uh…
RevDeb: Being bold here, as long as I’ve got this moment.
JK: I think it’s, it potentially could be very difficult, depending on what the overall makeup of the Senate is. If it were 50-50 you hit the nail on the head. If it’s not 50-50, if it’s less than that…
RevDeb: If it’s 51-49, including Lieberman on the D side, and he gets an appointment….
JK: Who knows what happens? I can’t predict –
RevDeb: I know.
JK: Yeah. I just can’t even speculate on that kind of stuff. I think that… let’s wait and see what happens on November 7. I just don’t even want to go down the road of speculation. I just don’t think it takes you anywhere.
RevDeb: Well, we’re working as hard as we can and I just –
JK: I think the key is for people to understand the stakes.
RevDeb: We do.
JK: To me, the war is front and center. The – what is happening is unconscionable, what is happening is still a slide-off; they’re sort of playing a game with this, you know, “We’ve given up the phrase ‘stay the course.'” I mean, what are they, what is this?
RevDeb: They said they never used it.
JK: That’s bunk. I get angry about that.
Charley: How does the Senate get accountability from the administration? I mean, the fact is, even if the Democrats take the Senate, even if the Democrats take the House, Bush is still the Commander in chief for another two years. So what happens? What measures of accountability can you foresee?
JK: Well, you have enormous ability to begin the process of accountability through hearings. Obviously through funding. And you have an ability to really push the policy. And at that point, you can legislate. The President can veto, but you can legislate. But it becomes a very if you’re going to have a bipartisan policy in the best interests of the nation, they’re going to have to stop and listen. And it really changes the dynamics. We’ll just have to wait and see where we come out. I mean, I – we’ve got a lot of close races.
RevDeb: Yeah.
JK: And we’re working them hard. As I just said, I’m going out today. We’re trying to raise money for those four key Senate races right now, and I hope we’ll be successful. And, you know, we’re concerned about it enough that Teresa and I are going to contribute personal money, and we’re going to put every effort we can into winning. In fact, I’m going today. I’m leaving for New Jersey after today. Tomorrow I got to New Jersey to help Bob Menendez. I’m going to Connecticut for Ned Lamont. I then go to, you know, a number of other states –
RevDeb: Virginia. Tennessee.
JK: Yeah. I’m just, I’m doing a lot. But, you know, this you folks are a new part of the media, like it or not. You may not want to call yourselves that, but you’re media. And, as such, you earn a spot at the table where people are going to, you know, want to try to make sure that you’re understanding what we’re fighting for. And what our point of view is about those fights, so that you reflect them, hopefully at least, dealing with knowledge.
RevDeb: Well, we hope that you’ll be hearing where we’re coming from, too. We’d like for this to be a two-way thing.
JK: It’s got to be. I understand. But we’re open. I mean, this is a beginning, just to sit down and have a discussion, and I’m happy you know, you want to call, contact us? We’re here.
RevDeb: We know, John.
JK: We’re in the business of trying to get the message out. That’s our business. So –
RevDeb: Thank you.
JK: You know, we want to continue that. Alright?
RevDeb: I’d love to get our whole group to meet with you.
JK: Let’s do it.
RevDeb: Ok.
JK: We’ll do it. We’ll do it after the —
Rev Deb: After the election.
JK: Happy to do it. After the election, I’m pretty much flying out the next ten days, then I’m back here. Then I’m back here for several days, right?
JK Staffer: Yeah, you’re back.
JK: I’m winding up with Deval and Teddy and doing the stuff back –
RevDeb: Go Deval!
JK: Ok? Nice to see you. Thank you. Thanks for your, you know, thanks for caring enough to get involved like this. It’s important.
next time kerry grants you some time, ask him why he opposes the civil rights of lesbian and gay voters. his “amend the state constitution but not the federal constitution” is just another of his shameless, endless attempts to have things both ways. many of us who believe we all deserve equal rights will never vote for anyone who seeks to deny any citizen equality.
The principle is right but on the national level in recent years sentiment has gone in the opposite direction. Hopefully it will be changing if some of these anti gay marriage ammendments are beaten down and the democrats at least one house of congress.
That’s why the meeting happened. BUT what we really want is dialogue. I can’t speak for Charley, but my interest is in an exchange of ideas. We are not reporters just there to “get the truth out” we are concerned citizens who pay a lot of attention to what is going on and want to affect the change that needs to happen in our government.
<
p>
We shall see what happens, but this was a good start. I appreciate the Senator’s desire to begin the dialogue.
I just listened and I thought he asked a general question to you about what you were thinking and what you thought other bloggers were thinking or were concerned about. Did I not hear that question correctly? I found that somewhat remarkable; he was asking you for a dialogue and he gets the importance of blogs.
we were certainly asking him for a dialogue which is why I asked why he had asked us to come in. Yet, our meeting was referred to as an “interview” by his press aide. Ten minutes really doesn’t allow for much of a dialogue and Charley and I aren’t the sum total of the blog world. We need to get more people around the table. I see this as a beginning. We’ll see where it goes.
He seems kinda scared about the possibilities there too; he didn’t want to think about it.
<
p>
I really do have to say that while I’d like to see him donate a whole lot more money, it is good to see him fundraising so much for others. Say what you want about Kerry, but he has done a lot of fundraising for others.
Sen. Kerry has been everywhere this campaing season. I know he has helped raise $ for the Webb campaign,and he even helped out a friend of mine running for the state senate in New Hampshire.
Kerry’s bragging about raising a quarter of Duckworth’s primary money? If he had any familiarity with the netroots, he’d realize that thrusting Tammy Duckworth into IL-6 and trying to push aside Christine Cegelis is example number one of DC consultants running roughshod over local activists.
<
p>
Duckworth is a pretty good candidate with a real shot at winning. Can you tell me why Cegelis was so much better — aside from that she had run before?
Cegelis had gone to all the little community meetings, had talked with local activists, raised money from iside the district — all the things that Deval did.
<
p>
Then along comes Emmanuel, who orders in money and has Dem allied groups spring for Duckworth, and pushes her over the line. Classic parachute.
<
p>
That said, either one would have had a good chance to win in two weeks, and I’m rooting for Duckworth. It was just strikingthat Kerry would choose that race, of all the work he did, to highlight.
that led me to unsubscribe from his mailing list. Duckworth was one of three “Fighting Democrats” being supported; I don’t recall whether the other two had primary opponents. (I don’t think they did.)
<
p>
I sent back a scorching letter pointing out that Cegelis was already running, had done respectably against Hyde in 2004 and had built a good grassroots organiation in the months since then, and that pushing Duckworth — an outsider — in the primary was a waste of DCCC and other Democratic resources and a slap at the local Democrats they should be encouraging.
<
p>
Never did hear back…
2 weeks away from the election the first part of this interview is perpetutating the ridiculous line of questioning about Kerry’s support for other Democrats. Was this at the event with Kerry and Deval Patrick in support of disablilty rights. I didn’t hear the whole interview but what I heard at the beginning is a waste of time.
<
p>
Why disrespect Deval like that by using interview time to ask the same question that is being beat to death—despite explicit published numbers to the contrary? Sorry I enjoy this website but using limited time with this question just smells like a typical hack job on the senator. It is insulting to the cause of promoting disability rights — since that is what the day was supposed to be.
<
p>
It is definitely disrespectful to Deval Patrick to waste time with this nonsense before the election.
<
p>
As I said I can’t download the whole file yet–Hopefully it gets more relevant later.
It’s disrespectful to Deval to ask Kerry why he’s hoarding cash when Democrats desperately need it? What?
<
p>
first of all, the question is being beat to death because, just like “What is our exit strategy in Iraq?”, it’s a good question that has yet to be answered satisfactorily. Kerry has every right to run for president again, and every right to hoard cash from needy Democrats to do it. And we have every right to ask him why every time he shows up in public.
<
p>
If politicians aren’t asked tough off-topic questions, they’ll never be asked tough questions because they always control the topic. Would you have preferred a Larry King-like “So, just how awesome is Deval Patrick?” or “Deval is leading by almost 30 points. I say that’s pretty good — what’s your opinion?” How about “From this event, it seems like Deval likes disabled people. Am I right in thinking that?”
<
p>
Thanks Charley for asking the tough questions to one of our own.
2 weeks before an election where the issue should be Deval Patrick and his support for people with disabilities you bet it is disrespectful to Patrick and to the disabled people they were there to support.
<
p>
Maybe the interviewer felt like he had to get to the hot internet topic of the day in limited time–I could understand that. In that case I would consider it an honest mistake in judgement.
<
p>
I agree with the need to be ready for off-topic questions but this has the effect of adding ugliness to a hopeful event.
<
p>
I’m sorry you feel that way. I certainly didn’t mean it as a hatchet job on the Senator. A question is not an attack: It gives the subject of the question the opportunity to answer as he sees fit.
<
p>
In any event, I think it’s a fair question to ask, and a lot of people are interested in the answer. As Kerry says in his defense, he’s been a tireless fundraiser for Dems, no question. In bringing up the issue to begin with, it gives him a chance to highlight his record. In any event, it’s not just about him, but other safe incumbents in MA.
<
p>
Unfortunately, I couldn’t make it to the actual event, so I didn’t hear JK and Deval speak. Had we had more time, I would certainly have talked to JK about Deval a good bit more. I had several Governor-related questions on my list, but we didn’t have time to get to them.
<
p>
As for being “disrespectful” to Deval … gosh, I guess I’ll just let the accumulated content of this site defend me on that.
I thought this was at the Deval event about hope for people with disabilities it seems way off topic I should have made that clear. I am annoyed by this distracting issue.
<
p>
By disrepectful I mean here Deval Patrick and Senator Kerry were doing something wonderful and the first question ignores that and echoes the internet attacks against Kerry’s giving .
<
p>
In the short time I have been posting here I like it and I know you are a great Deval supporter.
<
p>
I obviously can’t make everyone do my bidding! I wish the real liberals and Democrats on the internet would spent less time echoing attacks on Kerry and more on not letting up on Healey and the Republicans.
<
p>
I would feel less defensive after 11/7/2006 and we have taken care of business.
After listening to the entire interview, I thought it was well done. So I have to disagree, but respectfully so. I like what you’ve brought to BMG since you’ve been here, so don’t be offended or discouraged.
<
p>
I understand that this was a disability related event, but the reality is that very few interviews at events correspond to the topic of the event itself. I would think this to be especially true in a situation where bloggers, who don’t have the time or the regular access to the candidates, are able to tie one down for ten minutes. The finance issue is one that has come up here on BMG a few times, and I salute Charley for addressing it. I also thought that the female interviewer (sorry, I didn’t pay attention to who that is) did a really good job of qualifying by talking about how many races have recently become competitive due to the Foley issue etc, and how they need the infusion of money to remain so. Lastly, I do think Kerry did a good job explaining himself.
<
p>
All else aside, I think it’s AWESOME that Kerry realizes the importance of what is going on at BMG and on other political blogs. An engaged citizenry armed with the tools we have ought be feared and respected by all candidates, and I think the fact that John Walsh (DP campaign manager), Jim McGovern, Jack Robinson, Andrea Silbert, and other pols have stopped by to speak for themselves here affirms that this is a growing sentiment.
Like I said, I couldn’t download the whole interview. I felt like I had to post while it was still fresh in my mind. I’ll give it another try.
I got the whole of it downloaded today and read the transcript last night.
<
p>
You guys did a great job
<
p>
I over-reacted based on the opening question and the hostile blog climate regarding John Kerry..
<
p>
I will still defend my senator when attacked–and I mistakenly thought this was one of those type things
<
p>
Sorry about that my response to the partal interview
I just got a robocall from Sen. Kerry tonight on question 3 – really annoying, please stop it Senator, stop it right now.
Ditto, except for the annoying part. I never answer my house phone anyway.
I know from first hand experience by the way John Kerry interacts with our elderly friend with mental retardation that he really means what he says in this letter. I have related this story and posted this letter before on Democratic Underground. In primary season February 2004 he turned away from reporters in Manchester to make sure Gil got a Firefighters for Kerry tee shirt. My wife knows Deval’s work with people with disabilities from his years in the justice office. She runs a residential program for people with devlopmental disabilities. She doesnt remember anything specific but she knew she had a support of the Justice Dept with Deval Patrick just like now she knows she has support of the governor’s office under John Lynch (she works in New Hampshire). John Kerry has met several of the people that she provides services to and treats them with real respect–looks them in the eye, addresses them as adults, and will spend time actually talking to them rather than treating them like children.
<
p>
This is a hot button issue for me because Deval Patrick, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and (in New Hampshire) Gov John Lynch are the best people we have around when it comes to people with disabilities. Decency with people who don’t have a voice is real mark of character in my book.
<
p>
This is a letter from last weeks Boston Metro
<
p>
http://boston.metro…..
<
p>
Better future for disabled workers
my view by john f. kerry
<
p>
OCT 19
Throughout Massachusetts, people with disabilities work hard to help keep our states economy strong. This month we honor their dedication by observing National Disability Employment Awareness Month. This month provides us with countless opportunities to celebrate the achievements made in disability employment, as well as a chance to assess what more can be done to ensure an accessible workplace for all.
This week, my office joined work sites across the state that participated in yesterdays Disability Mentoring Day. The day allowed employers the unique opportunity to mentor students with disabilities. The mentors opened their doors to a talented population of people who are too often overlooked in the hiring process. At the same time, the mentees gain valuable work experience and the ability to form a relationship with a local business or organization. Its a win-win situation for all.
Disability Mentoring Day began seven years ago with just a few dozen participants in the White House, but grew this year to more than 12,000 participants from all across the country. This year, I hosted Greg Getchell, a young man from Wilmington, in my office for the day. Greg is a 19-year-old full-time high school student who also holds down a part-time job. Having the opportunity to host Greg in my office reminded me of all the contributions that he and other people with disabilities make in their communities, schools, families and workplaces every single day.
It is imperative that we work to ensure that people with disabilities can continue to play a meaningful role in all our communities. In 2004, the latest year with available data, the employment rate for people with disabilities was 38 percent, compared to 78 percent for people without disabilities. This is unacceptable and clearly does not reflect the number of people with disabilities who want to be employed. Everyone who has a disability should have the opportunity to participate more fully in the workplace. As America begins to gray and baby boomers start to retire, we see an increasing need to replace large numbers of American workers. What a remarkable opportunity we have fill some of those jobs with highly capable people with disabilities. So now is the time to act.
In 2000, President Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order to hire 100,000 qualified people with disabilities within the federal government in five years. Because President Bush has failed to adequately continue the efforts, this important goal has not been reached. Instead, the last five years have seen a steady decline in the federal employment of people with disabilities. In the Senate, I have worked to ensure there is sufficient support for programs that assist people with disabilities enter the workforce and have co-sponsored the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act, which assures that more Americans with disabilities have the opportunity to participate in the workforce to lessen their dependence on public benefits.
It is now, during National Disability Employment Awareness Month, that we must encourage employers to see the potential and talent that people with disabilities can bring to their workplace.
What I am getting ends with Senator Kerry talking about money that he and Theresa are giving. It seems to be only 1/3 of the interview.
<
p>
Is that it or is there more?
The other points are described in the post.
I’ll just have to try again later. Only the first question or two is downloading for me then it just goes back to the beginning.
<
p>
I’m glad it was a good one. Now I definitely want to hear it all.
It is good to hear answers to real questions, rather than to the MSM gotcha questions.
I got 4/5ths of it this time. Thanks again and I will try again to finish it.
“Gotcha” is for professional media folks who are bored by the political process. I appreciate that hearing the same old talking points time after time makes one insanely bored.
<
p>
But if politics actually results in something that matters in peoples’ lives, then maybe you’d just want to ask simple, honest questions, and try to get the subject to respond in kind. I vastly prefer that kind of interview.
Sorry I missed it.
<
p>
And many thanks to Senator Kerry for his time and his interest in our burgeoning MA blogosphere.
but I am quite baffled by the “we were ahead of the curve” on Iraq quote. Could you perhaps provide some context? What the f*** is he talking about?
<
p>
Lieberman’s loyalties “could potentially be very difficult”? Gee, you’re two years (if not more) ahead of the curve on that one, too!
He meant in terms of public opinion: Iraq war critics (of which Kerry was one in ’04) did not carry the day in ’04.
All respect to the Senator, but I continue to think that his statement that if he had known in early ’03 what he knew in August ’04, he’d still have authorized the president to go to war, was when he lost the election. (That, and being for the $87 billion before he was against it.)
if you want to really see ahead of the Kerry curve, then check out my colleague David Caploe in February 2004, as it became clear that John “Electable” Kerry was the inevitable nominee.
At this point, too many people (including many Democrats) still trusted Bush on Iraq, unfortunately.
<
p>
They started to wake up on this issue somewhere during 2005.
The king of “i was for the war before i was againt it” says he wants out of iraq now because his finger in the air told him that’s what sells today — just like he supported or opposed the first gulf war, depending on his audience, etc., etc. He has no backbone when it counts.
<
p>
As for my litmus test — civil rights, about which i see not one question — he completely flunks, just as bubba (the man responsible for the defense of marriage act and don’t ask/don’t tell) does (and which deval points out in a herald article today). And how about accountability for the dems, who are as gutless and responsible as the republicans for the war and the supreme court? just because someone’s a democrat doesn’t make her/him a progressive, and certainly john kerry is no progressive.
User Post Diary: “BlueMass Group grills Kerry about ’06 money: Listen to his rebuttal”
Expect a very heavy load on your servers… 🙂
<
p>
Hey, Kossacks, stick around! This is a great place to find out more about Massachusetts politics.
BMGers who are also Kossacks, head on over to dKos and hit that recommend button. 🙂