Ed O’Reilly’s hometown newspaper has endorsed John Kerry for re-election. This is good news for the Senator. The Gloucester Times has sometimes been rough on the Senator during this campaign season, but when it comes down to brass tacks, they note that
…Kerry’s record over the past 24 years and leadership on issues ranging from the environment to veterans affairs, has won him national recognition that very nearly catapulted him into the presidency in 2004. He remains one of the most visible and respected members of the Senate.
and conclude that Ed O’Reilly has not made a strong enough case for the voters to choose him.
Please share widely!
endorsed the other guy. That kind of tells people everything they need to know, doesn’t it?
I think it’s cause Ed O’Reilly isn’t that strong of a candidate, but the issues that he brings up against Kerry are very real such as the vote to authorize the war in Iraq, marriage equality, and constituency services.
<
p>If only someone with experience like Martha Coakley or Barney Frank would run against him! I wish.
I think Kerry is very strong in his own right, and is simply unbeatable in Mass. If you watched the debate, I thought he was better than in 2004 explaining his IWR vote, the thought that went into it, and his position when Bush ignored his calls to not rush into war, form a coalition, and let U.N. weapons inspecters do their job. He said his mistake was believing what the CIA, the Pentagon, and Sec. Powell told him.
<
p>Considering that it was Kerry who came up with the Iraq plan in June 2006 that the entire Democratic party has embraced (the timetable for withdrawal), it is pretty clear that he is a leader on this issue. I do not think a stronger candidate than Ed O’Reilly can touch him on Iraq.
<
p>On gay rights, Kerry has a stellar record, so then it comes down to gay marriage. Again, I would like him to embrace the name marriage, instead of civil unions, but this is not a big enough difference to affect Massachusetts, which has a state law Kerry calls “settled law”. As Luftmensch says below: no, Kerry has not been a leader on the gay marriage issue. But he sure as heck would never take it away from anyone in Mass. Other than single issue voters who ignore Kerry’s record on gay rights, I don’t see this helping Ed O’Reilly.
<
p>The constituent services is quite subjective. I have heard lots of stories from constituents being very pleased with services. He did have a problem with it years ago, and I think that old history is the issue here coupled with the few dissatisfied customers being very loud with their complaints. I also think that with him moving up in senority, he will get even more people to work on it so it is at the premier level of Ted Kennedy. Having a freshman Senator coming in will most certainly NOT help constituent services.
A recent Suffolk University/WHDH-TV poll found 51 percent of people who have voted in previous general elections said it’s time to give someone other than Kerry a chance, while 38 percent said the senator deserves to be re-elected. Nine percent were undecided, and 2 percent didn’t respond.
<
p>As to Kerry’s vote to authorize the war in Iraq, he asked his top adviser about it’s effect on his chances to win the presidency. I think most people view that vote for what it was, and that was trying to seem tough on defense. Our other Senator Ted Kennedy certainly voted against it.
<
p>On marriage equality, Kerry does not support it and he doesn’t have a single constitutional reason for doing so. What’s worse, he’s using his own bias to form his public policy stances. Don’t try to make light of that.
<
p>And constituency services is the number one issue that I hear most people bring up. I know I’ve had some very bad experiences with his office. It’s even more than that however. It’s his lack of engagement. Will Kerry agree to doing town hall style meetings even in a non-election year like Patrick has done? Will Kerry do grassroots work and meet with ward and town committees like O’Reilly has done? I would love to see him get more involved and do some of this, but for some reason I kind of doubt it. This is someone who gave 19 minutes for a single debate in the primary. I think that speaks volumes.
Paul- I’ve been waiting days now for you and your candidate to show me that you know something about constituent services and send me the information about Ed O’Reilly’s long-standing ties to the GLBT community and the marriage equality effort. If Ed O’Reilly doesn’t have time for me when he’s a nobody, what would he be like in the Senate?
<
p>And didn’t you say that you in fact had a very positive experience with Kerry’s office? And getting all the correct information for an event that you wanted to cause a ruckus at? And what are your bad experiences- that they wouldn’t give you his minute-by-minute schedule? You’re a real beaut, Paul. You can criticize other candidates all day but here I am, waiting to hear back from you, a worker on Ed O’Reilly’s campaign and what do you give me- nothing, nada, zilch, zero.
<
p>So before you start running your mouth about constituent services, why don’t you ask your candidate what he was doing to further the cause of marriage equality prior to announcing for his run for the Senate? Ask him why someone so committed to the cause would donate thousands of dollars to gay marriage opponents?
<
p>But for now let’s focus on your poll- why don’t you ever reference the poll that matched up Kerry and O’Reilly that Suffolk did? The one that had it 64-20 Kerry?
<
p>Or why don’t you talk about how any poll that asks voters to decide between a known quantity and an unknown mystery (but in the mind of virtually every voter) superior candidate always comes up big for the “someone else?” Why don’t you talk about how Ted Kennedy used to lose to “someone else” by 40 points just a few years ago?
<
p>And Paul the fact that you’re now recycling O’Reilly’s moronic talking points makes me think that behind all your posts and your diaries and your comments that you really don’t have any ideas of your own.
<
p>John Kerry has been in office for 24 years- do you really think he hasn’t met with any ward or town committees? Do you even have the slightest clue what you’re talking about? After reading your O’Reilly apologist comments for months, I’m 100% convinced you don’t have the slightest clue about politics in Massachusetts.
because it’s about Kerry in general and speak’s to Beachmom’s point that he’s “unbeatable” in Mass which he certainly is not. When he’s put against O’Reilly he fairs much better and will probably win, but I think if we had a well known experienced candidate run against Kerry that they would win.
<
p>
<
p>My guess would be he can’t be any worse than Kerry is right now.
<
p>And I’m not a “worker”, I volunteered once. You haven’t mentioned calling his campaign by the way which I have suggested to you several times now. If you’re not willing to put any effort into it, well then that’s your loss. You’re the one who has that question, so you call them and ask.
<
p>I on the other hand don’t have that question. I’m fine with O’Reilly having better stances on several issues and actually lining up with the Massachusetts Democratic Party platform. Of course that’ll be weighed against Kerry’s experience and seniority in the Senate and for me personally the cost benefit analysis comes out in favor of O’Reilly. You may not like that being a Kerry supporter, but get over it. That’s my decision to make as a voter.
<
p>Well masshole, the vote to authorize the war in Iraq, marriage equality, and constituency services may be “moronic talking points” to you, but to others they’re very serious issues. Kerry did vote to authorize the war in Iraq (while our other Senator did not) and he does not support marriage equality (again, while our other Senator does). Those are facts. If you don’t like them, get a better candidate. The third issue is subjective, but it’s an issue that is brought up rather frequently by people.
The problem with a poll asked that way is that they always show the person way below where he really is. The problem is that anyone who thinks another person – Democrat or Republican , known or not known – could be better votes as they did here.
<
p>There was a similar poll in NJ concerning Lautenberg – and his numbers were far worse. He had a much stronger opponent, a Congressman who was expected to be a future party star. The primary there was in June and it was a very easy win for Lautenberg.
<
p>A poll done the same way on Kerry about a year ago had results similar to those you cite, but they also did trial heats between some of the most impressive Congressmen. Kerry beat all of them by double digits – I think by around 20%.
<
p>To assume all the people who prefer “someone” to Kerry would prefer O’Reilly to Kerry is unwarranted – I would assume that O’Reilly would do less well then the Congressmen used in the older survey.
His environmental plan is a confused mess. He attributed so many wonderful, unsubstantiated, vague miracles to it during the televised debate, that I immmediately said to myself “It’s a floor wax AND a dessert topping! It’s delicious — and just look at that shine!” (old SNL joke, don’t worry if you’re too young to get it…)
<
p>O’Reilly’s criticism of Kerry’s stance on gay marriage is weak because this has never been an issue Kerry has claimed to lead on. He has never actively voted AGAINST gay marriage whereas he did vote against the DOMA and he did refuse to use the issue of opposing gay marriage central to the last stages of his presidential campaign as Bill Clinton suggested. Kerry has an excellent record on gay rights issues and fully supports civil unions. Though not a leader on this issue, it’s clear from his other votes and positions on gay rights that he would never actively stand in the way of gay marriage.
<
p>Now we come to the reason Ed O’Reilly says underlies his whole decision to run for this senate seat: Kerry’s IWR vote. O’Reilly purposely simplifies and misrepresents the context of this vote to a degree that shows he doesn’t care about the war or national security or, most of all, careful, conscientious governing that protects America. He only cares about saying whatever it takes to smear and heckle Kerry in a pathetic attempt to win votes.
<
p>As a senator who has sat on the Foreign Relations Committee for two decades, Kerry knows full well the weight of a vote like the IWR. He did his homework. As he replied to O’Reilly’s ignorant charge during the debate that he hadn’t read the NIE, he did better than reading, he used the opportunities available to him as to few Americans, he went straight to the sources, talking to Colin Powell, then viewed as a man of honor and of his word, and to top generals about what the actual situation was. He was lied to, like everyone else in Congress and in our country.
Even with the “evidence” he had been handed that there were WMD’s in Iraq, he went further.
<
p>Before casting his vote, he spoke on the floor of the Senate and said that he was only voting yes because of Bush’s promise not to rush to war. Only because Bush was promising he would continue the weapons inspections, continue building a coalition, continue carefully examining the situation before committing any troops or weapons would Senator Kerry approve the resolution (NOT in any way a vote for war!)
<
p>Bush lied. Even though Bush and his highest officials lied and lied and rushed to war, Kerry has taken full responsibility for his vote, for actually trusting the word of a sitting president. He has said it was wrong and he has been the absolute leader in the Senate to end the war, to protect our troops in combat when Bush was refusing to send them tanks and body armor, to protect their families when they were in danger of losing their homes and their livelihoods. He, more than any other member of the Senate, has led the way consistently in trying to get us out of the mess Bush created. He has shown extraordinary vision and been proved right about everything he has said the Bush administration did wrong in pursuing this war. He has been proved right about everything he said in 2004 about how we could better defeat Al-Qaeda, end the threat of terrorism and make our nation truly secure from attack.
<
p>Senator Kerry is one of the strongest, smartest, most insightful minds we have on the big picture of our place in the world militarily and diplomatically. His seniority and experience continue to make him an essential voice on the Foreign Relations Committee and his position as chair of the subcommittee that oversees the situation in the Middle East is a godsend as we try to fix the foreign policy Bush broke and trampled into the dirt.
<
p>Kerry fights hard for the security of our nation, for slowing the ravages of global climate change and making America a leader in alternative energy, and he brings home money for MA to back up his compassion for those hit hardest by the mortgage crisis and foreclosures.
<
p>Want to know why? John Kerry cares. He cares about the people of this state and about the people of this country. He’s one of the top Senators we have in terms of hard work, brains and belief in the potential of America.
<
p>Ed O’Reilly is a heckler, plain and simple. A mean, sneering demagogue with nothing to say and nothing to offer except attacks on a good man. He has made a case only that he should return to much-deserved obscurity.
It’s not about issues (Kerry knows the issues)…it’s about Ed O’Reilly (who knows the issues, too, and who is not a mean, sneering demagogue. He is just more consistently liberal than Kerry)…it’s just about Kerry…as the Boston heral Editorial pointed out…(I apologize ahead of time for posting the whole editorial but it just gets so tiresome when incumbent’s supporters (even Democratic ones) feel the need to demonize and monsterize their opponents…even when they are 30 points ahead. It’s a shame. It’s why people hate politics.)
<
p>It’s time to focus, Sen. John Kerry
By Boston Herald editorial staff | Friday, September 12, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Editorials
<
p>”There is a reason 24-year-incumbent Sen. John Kerry has an opponent in this Tuesday’s Democratic primary, and frankly it has little to do with the war in Iraq and Kerry’s convoluted and frequently tortured stand on it.
<
p>At the state Democratic Party Convention – attended by the most ardent of the party’s faithful – some 23 percent of those worker bee Democrats opted to vote to put the name of Gloucester trial lawyer Edward O’Reilly on the ballot, despite the best efforts of Kerry and his operatives.
<
p>The rap on Kerry, especially by local officials and a host of Beacon Hill lawmakers, has always been that the junior senator can be counted on to show up every six years to renew acquaintances “whether he needs to or not.”
<
p>While Sen. Ted Kennedy is beloved, Kerry is tolerated. Kennedy’s office has always been first rate on the nitty gritty of constituent services, Kerry’s, well, not so much.
<
p>Yes, Kerry has a solid record on a number of economic issues – many related to his chairmanship of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. He has also championed tax measures aimed at boosting the critical biotechnology sector and other research-based industries.
<
p>But Kerry remains a remote figure for most voters. The man who might have been president, who spent a good deal of time running for that office prior to 2004, has not really regained his focus.
<
p>O’Reilly is an engaging populist with a down-home touch. And while we find his position on the Iraq war even less acceptable than Kerry’s, he has worked hard to build the kind of bridges with communities and local officials that Kerry has for too long neglected. When was the last time (or the first time) John Kerry attended the Leominster Stroll or visited a firehouse or a ham and bean supper in the Berkshires?
<
p>We will say what so many people in Massachusetts have whispered for so very long: John Kerry needs to pay far more attention to the people who have sent him to Washington year after year than he has in the past.
<
p>And if voters want to send him that message by casting a vote for Ed O’Reilly – well, we can’t disagree.”
<
p>Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/ne…
“had a point”. He also had a float in a parade with a figure to represent Kerry windsurfing, and then encouraged people to throw things at it. These two instances (and there are more) represent who Ed O’Reilly is, and frankly, the above posters were being mild in their criticism of him. As to him being more “liberal”, he has NO RECORD to back up his positions. One of his supporters admitted here on BMG that it is just a copy of the state Democratic platform — they just copied it and put it on his site. Not only does he have no record in public office to back up his positions, he has no record in activism for these progressive causes either. All you have is what he says. The only record he has to speak of is being a successful drunk driver defense attorney. How impressive (NOT).
As was done to beachmom’s comment is in no way “living and letting live.” Just sayin’.
LALL’s first comment had to do with a 95% success rate in getting people to vote for Ed O’Reilly just by talking to them, but s/he never answered when I asked what it was s/he says to convince these folks. See, I do lots of phone banking and talking on behalf of lots of candidates – I’m good at it, with a strong command of facts and issues and a great speaking voice, but I’ve never come close to a 95% success rate. With half of the population voting Republican, I can’t see how LALL does it either.
<
p>Something tells me LALL is a sockpuppet from the O’Reilly campaign, and we may not see many more posts from this person after Tuesday…
Geez John, would you stop calling me names. Are you still dwelling on that question you asked me weeks ago. Well here is my answer.
<
p>I tell these people that I am voting for Ed O’reilly because he is a feisty fighter who isn’t afraid to stand up to the status quo. He will
enter into the Senate with a fresh and realistic perspective of what it is like to actually earn a living and pay bills in this country. He is genuinely concerned about the lack of leadership in the Senate, the favors, the special interests and all the other negative things that hold the Senate back from accomplishing anything. John Kerry is a part of that problem. As well as many other lifers in Washington. Elections happen every 6 years for a reason. We have an opportunity for democratic change in Massachusetts. Are you ready for new leadership?
<
p>Overwhelmingly the answer is yes.
…is because you continue to act like a sockpuppet. There is not a snowball’s chance in hell that the cornball approach you outlined above works 95% of the time – if everyone is saying yes, they’re doing it to get the crazy person (you) away from themselves.
<
p>Ed doesn’t know the meaning of the word leadership – when he was on the Gloucester School Committee, he stepped down as chairman citing a lack of time. Is that leadership? A true leader would have found the time, no? Do you mention this to any of the folks you convince with your spiel?
You said “we may not see many more posts from this person after Tuesday…” you may be right on that one. I really have little time to blog and only do so when I am fighting for someone I believe is worth fighting for. In this case,
that would be Ed O’reilly. He will be an awesome Senator,
a fighter, a worker, a man whose heart is in Massachusetts
and a man who will fight for the working middle class.
He is a man who is definitely worth fighting for.
some examples of where he really fought for …oh, anything. He is a lawyer, are there cases, as John Edwards’ (or even Kerry’s very short career as a trial lawyer) had that showed his concern for the welfare of those with no voice. What examples of activism, we all know of Kerry’s activism before he was elected.
<
p>I see that you passionately believe in O’Reilly, the question I have is why. What I see is a very angry man, but not a man who has worked in any way for solutions to anything.
<
p>I also find it mystifing why you think that O’Reilly knows more about getting by on a pay check than Kerry. I know Kerry was born to a socially elite family, but his immediate family was not wealthy. Kerry made considerably less money as a Senator, than he did as a lawyer. Until marrying Teresa Heinz, he was one of the poorest Senators and he struggled to pay for his kids’ education and live in both Boston and DC, traveling each week to be with his daughters on the weekends.
<
p>O’Reilly has lived the life of the wealthy for pretty much of his adult life. He has two very expensive homes. It is very likely that of the two men, the last to not buy something because it was too expensive is likely Kerry.
If you think live and let living means one person must
hold back and not live so other may live fully, you are wrong. So you are the kind of person who feels you and beachmom should live fully and all others should keep
quiet about their opinion of your stance. Yes, sounds just like John Kerry to me. Kerry supporters are holding this
country back from much needed change and energy in our
government. You go ahead and keep on fighting for him,
and I will continue to keep fighting for Ed O’reilly.
That is live and let live. And if you want to delete this
comment, I could care less. I stand fully behind my opinion, no matter what anyone thinks.
I disagree with it, but that is no reason to zero rate it – though I’ve been zero rated when it was not deserved by you.
<
p>I fail to see how John Kerry has held back change – even on gay marriage. MA has gay marriage, the federal government doesn’t and Kerry is not the reason for either. On other issues, Iraq, non-state terrorism, healthcare (he with Kennedy wrote the precursor bill to S-CHIP), and the environment, he has been a force moving towards better policies.
<
p>As to O’Reilly, I will be happy never to hear his name again after Tuesday. One measure of how poor a candidaet he is, is when you ask yourself if after a year of full time campaigning, is he in say the top three opotential candidates if there is a special election? I think the answer is NO – not even with all the exposure he has had.
<
p>What has he done on anything to push things forward? (You can do things while not in office – Kerry likely got us out of Vietnam faster.)
He does have a record on the school committee, though, increasingly, I think most school committee issues are so non-ideological as to make it difficult to detect whether someone is progressive or not.
then quitting mid-term because it was too much work. I assume that that decision could have hurt his fellow members of the board who had to fill the void.
<
p>What is clear is that he has no known record of activism or advocacy on any issue. I have asked O’Reilly supporters repeatedly if they could list some. So what you have is a guy who spent a few years on the town council and the school board.
I think it was Masshole who put up a diary asking O’Reilly supporters to show how Ed had been working for one of the causes like gay marriage or single payer health care that he is running on, and they came up with zip. Nothing as a public servant or as an activist. I think that means something.
Just quoting a Boston Herald editorial in full neither supports your argument that Ed O’Reilly “knows the issues” nor negates my argument (which contains actual facts about Senator Kerry’s record and work) that John Kerry is an excellent Senator and representative for Massachusetts. He is in Massachusetts when he can be. The rest of the time he is hard at work at his “full-time job” in Washington (and when the Republicans force the Senate to stay in session until the early hours of the morning, he’s there then, too. This is not a 9-5 job.)
<
p>The office of Senator is a difficult and serious job. John Kerry works hard at it. Ed O’Reilly is simply not up to the task and the Gloucester Times has made that clear.
US Senators have huge staffs that basically do the work that needs to get done. A good job at good wages…free travel, great health care benefits, enormous vacation time…and US Senators are only “reviewed by their employer” every six years. Most of the time your boss doesn’t know what you are up to at all.
<
p>Americans hate politics because of the hypocrisy of elected officials who tend to serve their own ambition and interests over the people they were elected to represent. That is the point of the Herald editorial…Kerry does not connect with people…Kennedy does and Kennedy’s staff delivers on the constituent side so that you don’t notice that he isn’t in the state much either…kennedy makes sure the job gets done.
<
p>As for your title…sometimes the more you know about government (how it runs as opposed to how it was supposed to run) the less respect you have for the electeds who forgot what they were elected to for in the first place.
<
p>Kerry will win next Tuesday. He will win in November. But with no standing ovations.
Senator Kerry is the first to admit, for instance, that the Congressional health plan is one of the best in the country. That’s why he wanted to give the same plan to everyone in the country when he ran in 2004. And he’s still fighting to make that possible through legislation and by supporting Barack Obama for President.
<
p>You are still showing your ignorance. There are plenty of senators (mostly Republicans, but on both sides of the aisle) who don’t pull their weight, who do very little to merit their titles and positions. John Kerry is not one of them. I doubt you’ll ever be able to put aside your blind hate enough so that you can see the truth, but the state of MA is one of the few in the nation with two senators who work hard every day to make government work as it’s “supposed to run.”
<
p>I think you need to watch more C-SPAN. If you really follow the Senate sessions and the committee hearings, it’s impossible not to see how much fire, conviction and honor Senator Kerry puts into every floor speech, every hearing, every decision and vote. And it’s been anything but cushy for Democrats who have been dealing with Republican filibusters and roadblocks to slow or kill any progressive legislation. It’s a hard fight, which is why John Kerry is leading the campaign to help elect a Democratic majority with enough votes to give the progressive agenda a chance.
<
p>If you don’t know what your “employee” is up to, it’s because you’re not paying attention. A very small amount of research into the C-SPAN archives or the Congressional Record would show you that every move your public servants are up to on the job is recorded for you to review. When you have educated yourself and want to discuss actual Senate business, I’ll be happy to listen to you.
Pontification is not the key to winning the hearts of voters.
<
p>People who work 40-60 hours a week, pay their own health care insurance costs, don’t get per diem for travel and food, don’t have staffs (big staffs) to pass the work off to, don’t have time to ski in Aspen, play in the Vineyard and globetrot…these poor shmucks may not have the time to glue themselves to C-Span to keep daily watch on their representatives (as you may)….they are too busy trying to figure out how to pay for gas, food and college tuitions while awaiting the heating bill blow they are about to sustain this winter.
<
p>(Haven’t you figured out why Kerry lost Ohio YET?)
<
p>And as for your last “I’m so superior to you” comment…you have no idea what my academic credentials are or my political and government experience…but I can bet the farm that I could go toe to toe with you…but my greatest advantage over you would not be my educational degrees (once you get them you realize they are overrated), it would be political common sense and respect for another’s point of view which sometimes, if you’re lucky, comes with age and experience.
<
p>
True, I don’t know anything about you, but then I never claimed to, except to comment on the paucity of substance in your comment (how you like them elitist, pontificatin’ words, huh?) You, on the other hand, are projecting like a movie palace (this is what Republicans do when they have no real argument.)
<
p>Believe me, I work hard for a living and have very little time to spare from worrying about my heating bills. I also choose to watch C-SPAN because I want to see what is going on in my government. And it would do you good to check out their video archive — it’s got everything you need to learn.
As a matter of fact, my political knowledge has nothing to do with formal education — I learned everything I need to know from using my eyes, ears, experience and political common sense. And C-SPAN, which is any American citizen’s best unbiased, unfiltered, complete record of what goes on in Congress.
<
p>
True, I don’t know anything about you, but then I never claimed to, except to remark on the paucity of substance in your comment (how you like them elitist, pontificatin’ words, huh?) You, on the other hand, are projecting like a movie palace (this is what Republicans do when they have no real argument.)
<
p>Believe me, I work hard for a living and have very little time to spare from worrying about my heating bills. I also choose to watch C-SPAN because I want to see what is going on in my government. And it would do you good to check out their video archive — it’s got everything you need to learn.
As a matter of fact, my political knowledge has nothing to do with formal education — I learned everything I need to know from using my eyes, ears, experience and political common sense. And C-SPAN, which is any American citizen’s best unbiased, unfiltered, complete record of what goes on in Congress.
<
p>
I hate that we can’t edit our comments if we find typos or want to change a word, so I tried it to see what would happen. Now I know. 🙂
I agree with Luftmensch on the quality and quantity of Kerry’s work. I too list CSPAN or links to committee hearings What do you want a Senator who works hard and well on a multitude of issues to do to convince you and others about his work?
<
p>Also, there is NO reference to your degrees in her/his post. The word “educate” referred to looking into the Senator’s record before condemning it.
Ditto….
I think you are wrong. Good Senators are extremely busy and make very good use of their staff. As to a good wage, the fact of the matter is that most Senators could easily make far more money, the same healthcare benefits, and work far fewer hours.
<
p>As to vacation time, it depends on the Senator. It is idiotic to simply say all days when the Senate is not in session are vacation. The Senator needs to spend time in his district, which Kerry does. Kerry also travels a lot for the SFRC
<
p>In addition, you mention the free travel. Frankly, would you want to have gone to the countries Kerry visited last year? Remember that he usually spent at most 2 to 3 days packed with meetings in each country. Fun countries like Iraq, Afghanistan (where he, Hagel and Biden had a scare being on a helicopter that was forced to land in a blinding snow storm in the mountains), Pakistan, India, Jordan, Israel, Eqypt. He also went to a few South African countries to personally see who Prepar, the anti-AIDS initiative is doing – Kerry was the earliest support of doing such a program. It was to be reauthorized in the SFRC, so oversight was needed.
<
p>He also visited Bali, a beautiful vacation spot. However, he left as the Senate adjourned, flew to Bali, participated in meetings, formal and informal and then flew back to be at the Senate for votes early the next week. 40 hours on commercial flights for 36 hours of meetings. Meetings where, Ambassador Stuart Eizenstat (around 4 minutes in), who was part of the official delegation, said:
<
p>”The fact that we had a treaty was significantly due to the fact that Senator Kerry was there. He was a virtual part of our negotiating team, without his day and night support and lobbying of the EU. we would not have gotten a treaty.”
http://www.kerryvision.net/200…
<
p>I challenge you to go over to Kerryvision.net, an independent site that supports Kerry. Every week there is a “newsreel”, pick about 4 weeks at random and watch them. The fact is that he is a workaholic – the opposite of the right wing smear.
<
p>I assume that there will be standing ovations, but not from you. (In fact, he got quite a few standing ovations at the recent Democratic Convention, because his speech, which he wrote and which the Obama people did not vet, was amazing. Just because you are unimpressed, does not mean everyone is.)
support a supposedly left wing candidate. The fact is that the Boston Herald will endorse Beatty, not a Democrat. Moat of what is said about the convention here is not all that accurate per accounts of people there. It also ignores that there were only two choices and Kerry got 78%.
<
p>There were reports of people saying that they were voting against him out of anger over his endorsement of Obama. As to “focus”, there has been no MORE focused Senator in the Senate representing the liberal wing of the Democratic party … likely the true reason that the Boston Herald does not like him.
and it’s a RW rag.
demonization of opponents — This is the tone the O’Reilly campaign (surrogates or supporter-hard to tell who’s who) set early on. After the debate O’Reilly lamented that Kerry does not like the “sport of politics” . His support for revisiting the Swiftboat claims is an example of the “sport of politics” .
Interesting, a man who succeeded in getting the nomination for President “does not like the sport of politics”? It takes major chutzpah for someone whose political career is limited to town council and the school board in the 1980s to make this charge.
<
p>If he means the politics of swiftboating and character assassination, O’Reilly is correct – as Kerry has said of Obama, he wants to end the politics of swiftboating. What Kerry seems to love is attending the parades, holding smiling babies – as he did in Plymouth on the Fourth of July, and meeting with ordinary people in all the Kerry on your corner events. They are fun to watch – and he does connect to people.
<
p>That he didn’t want to spend much time with O’Reilly, a man for whom no RW smear against Kerry is too base to use, is understandable. Kerry gave him the one debate they agreed to, and as soon as it was over, O’Reilly demanded more than was agreed to.
to say anything with sport as an excuse I have to question all his other assertions about his progressive promises. This attitude is one of the reasons I distrusted O’Reilly and/or some (not all) of his early supporters. He sarcastically derided the Pan Mass Challenge as a “bike ride”. He jumped all over Kerry here at BMG over the taser incident (a thread that was quickly put down) and he still does not say who he supports for president. When Kerry supporters put together their own counterpunches they are slammed for being “operatives” or “surrogates”.
Oh, you mean like he did in 2004 by supporting a constitutional amendment? I guess there goes that argument.
From your link:
<
p>
<
p>Now let’s ask something: have you EVER seen anyone actually propose a constitutional amendment that would give same-sex couples all legal rights that married couples receive (except the right to call it marriage)?
<
p>I can answer that: you haven’t and you won’t. Because the folks who really want to ban gay marriage don’t want to offer fully privileged domestic partnerships either. (psst… ever heard of a “poison pill”?)
What do you call that Paul? Youthful indiscretion?
because that’s on par with the actual candidate supporting a constitutional amendment. Lame argument.
Look at the date. Kerry was the very likely winner of the Democratic nomination at that point – he clinched it the following week (at that point he had won 16 primaries or caucuses and no one else more than one.)
<
p>It was already clear it was going to be a wedge issue. The position Kerry stated is exactly the same as Obama’s position. The fact is that Kerry calling for full federal rights was beyond what any nominee of the party called for when running. It was completely consistent with his excellent record on civil rights.
<
p>To have thrown his weight for gay marriage at that time would have been political suicide. a suicide that most Democrats would have criticized.
Also, has Kerry financially supported opponents of marriage equality? Again, who and when?
This is no place for essays, if you have that much to say then write a blog.
Just for fun.
For political prognosticator bragging rights only.
<
p>WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTE FOR US SENATE DO YOU THINK ED O’REILLY WILL RECEIVE AGAINST JOHN KERRY?
Through in predictions of Chang-Diaz v Wilkerson, and other primary races…
57-41 for Kerry. 2% write in 3rd party, none of above
Kerry 60%
O’reilly 28%
No vote 10%
<
p> I would say if Kerry doesn’t win 70% of his own party’s primary, look out for Jeff Beatty!
<
p> About Kerry’s current commercial: He says he’s bringing heating oil aid to MA. Wednesdays Worcester Telegram says federal will be cut.
<
p>http://www.telegram.com/articl…
<
p> Who’s lying? I’ll trust the Telegram.
O’Reilly 22%
<
p>this is percentage votes cast.
was enough to turn me away from him completely, though I’d had an open mind toward him before.
<
p>From an account by the State House News Service:
<
p>
<
p>Okay, so O’Reilly pesters Kerry for a debate. Kerry agrees. Then O’Reilly tells his supporters not to show up. And then the best O’Reilly can say about himself after the debate is that he’s never debated before and is proud of himself for not fainting? Is it any mystery that Kerry doesn’t want to waste any more time debating this clown?
Hi everyone! Ed Augustus is retiring! Here’s a little blurb about Mike Moore who is a Millbury Selectman running for state senate.
<
p>“Work hard, and give back to your community…that was one of the many lessons Mike Moore learned from his parents. Born and raised in Millbury, MA, Mike has spent his entire adult life doing just that.
<
p>A standout athlete at Millbury High School, Mike worked nights and weekends to help support himself and save money for college. Upon graduation, he continued his education at Nichols College and Worcester State College, then moving on to attend the full-time Waltham Police Academy. Fulfilling his goal of establishing a career in public safety, Mike earned a position with the Department of Environmental Police, as a Police Officer and then an Investigator working with the Attorney General’s Office.
<
p>Throughout his 18-year career with the Environmental Police, Mike maintained his focus on higher education, attending Western New England College nights and weekends to achieve a Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Criminal Justice. Mike chose to broaden his work experience by becoming an Assistant Deputy Superintendent at the Worcester County Sheriff’s Office, responsible for the Community Service Program, inmate reintegration program, and Senior Citizen community outreach safety programs.
<
p>Under his leadership, the Sheriff’s Office created the Worcester County TRIAD senior citizen program, working to identify and address senior citizen safety concerns in individual towns throughout the county with programs that include: house number, 911 Cell Phone Bank, Beacon of Light, File for Life, and many more. Mike was also responsible for development of the Area Law Enforcement Response Transmission (ALERT) program, which sends a daily email out to law enforcement officials on recently released inmates, and the Responsible Fatherhood Initiative, a Department of Revenue sponsored program that confirms parenthood of inmates to reduce welfare fraud. The Community Service Program has likewise saved Worcester County cities and towns over $3.8 million in labor costs over the last three years for local projects.
<
p>In keeping with his commitment to public service, he is now serving in his seventh year on the Millbury Board of Selectmen.
<
p>Mike is married to Ellyn Lazar-Moore, an Assistant District Attorney with the Worcester County District Attorney’s office, with two children, ages 4 and 6.”
What does this have to do with the Kerry-O’Reilly contest for U.S. Senate?
I was considering tossing him a vote. Now I’m reconsidering. What is his relationship to the Sherriff? By that I mean how did he get his job?