From a Kerry On Your Corner event in Worcester, August 18th. A retired fireman asked what Senator Kerry thinks about Al Gore’s challenge to get off of oil dependence in 10 years. Senator Kerry talks about why it’s important to set the goal even if we don’t know how it can be achieved.
From a Kerry On Your Corner event in Quincy, August 5th. Senator Kerry answers a question about offshore drilling, explaining exactly why it is “snake-oil salesman phoniness.”
From the August 5th event in Quincy. Senator Kerry answers a question about how soon we can realistically withdraw from Iraq. Senator Kerry says that Barack Obama’s 16-month timetable is reasonable, and discusses why it’s essential that the US send signals that it is moving towards withdrawal. John Kerry was one of the first to call for a deadline to withdraw from Iraq, by the way — in his 2006 NYT editorial he called for setting a deadline, and immediately introduced the first binding Senate legislation (cosponsored by Russ Feingold) to set a timetable for withdrawal. Since Democratic leadership was not in favor of the plan, debate on the proposal was pushed to late in the evening, when few people would be watching CSPAN, and the resolution got only 13 votes. I mention this because a lot of people seem to be unaware of this, and in fact Jeff Beatty is running around telling people that Senator Kerry got interested in withdrawal from Iraq only quite recently — a claim that is easily disproven, but I guess he’s counting on people not to google it. In this clip, however, Senator Kerry refers to Obama’s plan for withdrawal without going into all this history.
This is a longer one — a complete recording of an event at the Off-Broadway Cafe in Taunton on August 19th. Starts with State Senator Marc Pacheco introducing Senator Kerry. It should give you a feeling of what it’s like to attend one of these events.
They probably have the most evenly cynical (and quite possibly accurate) view of the Kerry-O’Reilly race in “How to Make a Senator Sweat“. It addresses O’Reilly:
<
p>
<
p>as well as Kerry and his dilemma:
<
p>
<
p>and artfully depicts a typical John Kerry event
<
p>
<
p>I’m already treading close to fair use quoting this much…go over there and read the whole thing.
but misses more important things. From the videos Noisy Democrat posted, Kerry is very engaged with each of the crowds. I clearly do not see “brutally lifeless Q & A sessions”, what I see is a serious statesman trying to answer serious questions from his constituents.
<
p>Watching all these videos, I do not see him look uncomfortable in the least. I do see a very sincere person, who is very respectful to the people he is speaking too. This is the same impression I had at Two of the Kerry speeches I went to and at two of the book events he had.
<
p>I suspect some of this is the author projecting what his own feelings would be – had he come that close to being President and now running again for Senate – and he kind of says how he would be.
<
p>This ignores that Kerry went back to the Senate as soon as it came back in session, reached out to his email list to ask them to stay involved to keep fighting, then was one of the strongest leaders of the left wing of the Democratic party – leading on filibustering Alito with Kennedy and fighting to set a deadline for Iraq with Feingold. He also was the only person from Congress to attend the Bali conference. He fought hard in 2006 raising money and campaigning for Democrats and by acting as an attack dog to protect 3 now freshman Congressmen who were Iraq vets who were being swiftboated. Think about that – the 2004 standard bearer of the party acting as an attack dog for incoming Freshman Congressmen.
<
p>Then look at how well he has acted as a surrogate for Senator Obama. On Face the Nation and in his convention speech, when he said that Bush is moving to Obama’s position on things from North Korea, Iraq, and containing nuclear arms, he did NOT mention that all of these were his positions before they were Obama’s. He was there to make the case for Obama.
<
p>What these things show, is that Kerry’s motivation to serve the country is very deep and he genuinely does respect the honor he has been given to serve as Senator. I’m sure he would have preferred to win in 2004, but as much for what he could have done as for ego. Now, it is clear that he is poised as a Senator with a large amount of senority in what will likely be the biggest Democratic majority of his career to really be able to push the issues he has fought for.
That the videos released by a prolific Kerry supporter do indeed make Kerry look good, whereas a write-up by a snarky, but even-handed reporter, says different. I also agree that Kerry has served as an Obama surrogate, a role that I would hope we would continue after the September primary.
<
p>I find it hilarious that you credit Kerry with “leading” a filibuster of Alito considering he called it in from Switzerland:
<
p>
Senate Finance Committee. Condi Rice was there as well, as were numerous American and world leaders. http://www.weforum.org/en/even…
Off-the-record hobnob of muckymucks, or mounting an effective opposition to a reactionary theocrat’s installation for life into the Supreme Court. At least we know what Kerry chose.
The Davos conference is important and Kerry had a commitment to be there – as did several other Senators.
<
p>Do you seriously think that being in DC would have made it easier for Kerry to mobilize support? His DKOS diary that guided people to lobby Senators was copied throughout the left blogosphere. It didn’t matter where it was written. It led some Senators, who did not want a filibuster – like HRC – to support it.
<
p>As to personally lobbying the Senators – how many do you think there were who were even candidates for lobbying. Kerry knew those already in favor. He knew many Republicans were strong advocates. I would be surprised if there were more than 25 to lobby. Kerry had a blackberry.
<
p>The NYT, which was very snarky to Kerry and Kennedy had actually written an editorial on the day after Kerry and Kennedy had lobbied the caucus asking for a filibuster and it was clear they wanted Clinton to lead it. Had the Democratic leadership opted to lead it – pushing people to vote against cloture it might have had a chance. There are many people you can criticize on this, Kerry is not one of them.
It was not called in from Davos. Kerry and Kennedy lobbied the Democratic caucus at their caucus lunch and tried to get sufficient support there. Kerry then left for Davos, where he was suppose to be part of a panel. While there, he posted on DKOS an appeal for people to lobby their Senators – even listing ones that were not for it, but had the potential for being won over with enough pressure.
<
p>There were about 45 Democratic Senators. Kerry had a blackberry. Between Kennedy in DC and Kerry, I’m sure they could convey all the arguments each had whether physically there or not. Other than personal persuasion and generating public support, what can be done to get 41 Senators to not vote for cloture? (a no or not voting counts the same)
<
p>In addition, when Frist moved up the vote, Kerry immediately left Davos and surprised Republicans by appearing on the floor of the Senate and giving his first speech against voting for cloture. He gave a second speech on the day they voted for cloture. That speech was one of the strongest speeches I ever heard in the Senate. (It is available on Thomas – it was given on January 30, 2006) In summary, Kerry said:
<
p>” I understand that, for many, voting for cloture on a judicial nomination is a very difficult decision, particularly on this Supreme Court nominee. I also understand that, for some of you, a nomination must be an “extraordinary circumstance” in order to justify that vote. I believe this nomination is an extraordinary circumstance. What could possibly be more important than this?
<
p> This is a lifetime appointment to a Court where nine individuals determine what our Constitution protects and what our laws mean. Once Judge Alito is confirmed, we can never take back this vote. Not after he prevents many Americans from having their discrimination cases heard by a jury. Not after he allows more government intrusions into our private lives. Not after he grants the President the power to ignore Federal law under the guise of protecting our national security. Not after he shifts the ideological balance of the Court far to the right. “
<
p>Here is what Senator Kennedy said the same day on Kerry’s role:
“First of all, I thank my friend, Senator Kerry , for his strong commitment on this issue and his eloquence, passion , and support of this position. This is a time in the Senate that a battle needs to be fought. This vote that we are casting with regard to Judge Alito is going to have echoes for years and years to come. It is going to be a defining vote about the Constitution of the United States, about our protections of our rights and our liberties in the Constitution of the United States.”
<
p>The fact is that Kerry was the biggest force behind this and he was right. The problem was that the leadership was afraid to fight. In addition, the Judicial committee Democrats did a poor job. Kerry was one of the few to use the right arguments – the reason he should have been defeated were on grounds like “unitary President” and other out of the mainstream judicial beliefs. Any Bush nominee would be pro-life – the issue some used in their speeches.
<
p>At the time, it was clear from Kerry’s Daily Kos diary that it would be hard to win – but they needed to try.
<
p>Kerry did everything he could on this – there are many other Democrats who did little or nothing to help.
That the videos released by a prolific Kerry supporter do indeed make Kerry look good, whereas a write-up by a snarky, but even-handed reporter, says different.
<
p>Actually, I’m not picking and choosing to find clips that make Senator Kerry look good; I’m just trying to post clips that I think people will find interesting (and that have halfway decent visual quality — I figure people won’t want to see the parts where my hand got tired and the camera panned the ceiling). A friend of mine who didn’t know much about John Kerry, other than what little got through the media filter back in 2004, watched the raw footage from an hour-long videotape with me and kept exclaiming, “He’s so warm and engaging! He seems like a really nice man.” That’s what you see throughout the video I’ve shot at nearly a dozen events.
<
p>The implication that somehow a written report by a journalist is more authoritative than video that was shot by a supporter seems questionable. I thought the idea of citizen journalism is that we don’t have to rely on the MSM to interpret things for us; we bring back our own first-hand reports and search out facts for ourselves. What I’m putting up gives a very accurate picture of exactly what I’ve seen at these events. To say that we should take the word of the MSM over the documentary evidence of video reminds me of the old joke about a man whose wife walks in on him in bed with another woman. The man protests, “Now, honey, who you gonna believe — me, or your lyin’ eyes?”
I really digg the Gonzo-style political writing.
<
p>Best line:
<
p>
He’s hyper, garrulous, and funny, a hustler. Now, there are many qualities that are desirable in a Senator – these are not the ones that come to mind. Three of them, all but funny, have negative connotations – and “funny” doesn’t make you a good candidate for Senate.
<
p>However, the real Gonzo political writer, Hunter Thompson, described Senator Kerry as “a good man with a brave heart” and mentioned that he knew him for three decades. (quote from an October Rolling Stone magazine article by him)
These are fantastic videos of Senator Kerry. Your web site is great.
God knows I have my differences with John Kerry, but some of the points he is making make a lot of sense.
<
p>Some may harbor resentment toward John for his stands (usually concerning form not function) and fight (highnsight is always 20-20). But John has an can continue to do good work for us in the U.S. Senate.
<
p>Is John perfect? No. None of us is perfect.
<
p>Is John a good and effective senator? Yes.
<
p>Would John have made a great president? Probably.
<
p>Are we disappointed he didn’t win in 2004? Of course.
<
p>Have we gotten his attention? Yes.
<
p>Has more fight returned to his step? I think so.
<
p>John Kerry has earned re-nomination and should be returned to the Senate to fight for us!
<
p>
.
I hope we still have it a couple of years from now, when he’s not asking for our votes.
“Effective” and “impressive” don’t come to mind when describing the Senator, at least to this observer.
<
p>Those two adjectives could be used to describe his role as Obama surrogate, but we are not being asked to re-elect a surrogate.
<
p>You know, if John Kerry was confident in his impressive Senate record, he would not delegate 20 minutes on a Sunday morning (8:30)- available to be seen only by those within or nearby Rt. 128- to discuss it.
<
p>I don’t think the Senator has earned re-nomination – far from it.
passed – ranging from his Affordable Housing Fund that he fought for for a decade and the other Kerry provisions that provided help for people hurt by the mortgage crisis that were in the recent Banking committee bill to having led the Democrats to a position of setting a deadline on Iraq, to the various veterans bill, to his legislation which provides tool against international money laundering, to his having been the entire Congressional delegation at Bali, but you’ve heard all that before and apparently must not consider any of that important.
<
p>So, I will just say that he was ranked as the 12th most powerful Senator. Now, that ranking had HRC, Obama, and McCain included – all elevated because they were then contenders. By January 2009, Kerry will be in the top 10. (He has far more seniority and has contributed far more to legislation than HRC) That seems effective to me.
<
p>As to debating Ed O’Reilly, there are plenty of precedents where an incumbent in a very strong position doesn’t debate a primary opponent with the polling that O’Reilly has. The most comparable in recent history was that there was NO HRC/Tasini debate. O’Reilly’s initial demand of 23 debates was ludicrous and his unwillingness to speak to anyone other than Senator Kerry for weeks did not help set up a debate. Isn’t WBZ, channel 4, the CBS affiliate in Boston? What channel would you prefer?
but having more seniority and having had a hand in more legislation than Hillary Clinton is not much of an argument for JK’s effectiveness.
<
p>In the first place, his having been in the Senate for such a long time is half of the argument against his being effective – as in, ‘he’s been there so long, and done so little.’
<
p>In the second place, has HRC been a particularly effective Senator?
by explaining that some of those rated higher were higher because they were the Presidential candidates which inflated their ratings.
<
p>In the first paragraph, I listed accomplishments that he has had in the last 6 years. It is not true that he did little. His years in the Senate plus his expertise on a vast array of issues is important. A large amount of seniority is needed to be a leader in a body that places great value on seniority.
Must be 2008. He shows up every 6 years to reacquaint himself with his new best friends. Sure was interesting when he had to scurry away 15 minutes before Jeff Beatty and Ed O’reilly showed up in Agawam a couple of weeks ago. My question to anyone affiliated with labor supporting Kerry: Whats your cut? I’d love to see O’reilly ask about Kerry’s 2004 nonvote about extending unemployment benefits. It lost by Kerry not voting.
were at the picnic in Agawam at the same time. I was there, so I know. I ran into Ed O’Reilly first, and a moment later found John Kerry. As for best friends, I was very surprised to see how tight Ed O’Reilly was with Jeff Beatty at that thing.
In 2004, they would schedule votes and if Kerry came to DC to vote, they re-scheduled them. On that bill, the Democratic leadership knew they did NOT have the votes. The Republicans had enough Republicans vote for it to make it a tie to embarrass John Kerry. Had he continually showed up, as they changed the dates, it still would not have passed. It was politics.
<
p>How have the labor unions endorsed?
He was running for president at the time too. Kerry didn’t do his job. It was defeated. How are we to expect him to do his job now. 24 years of same old same old is enough. Let us follow Nobama, in this case, change is good.
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 108th Congress – 2nd Session
<
p>as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
<
p>Vote Summary
<
p>Question: On the Motion (Motion To Waive CBA Cantwell Amdt. No. 2617 )
Vote Number: 18 Vote Date: February 26, 2004, 04:06 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2617 to S. 1805
Statement of Purpose: To extend and expand the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 58
NAYs 39
Not Voting 3
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
<
p>Alphabetical by Senator Name
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Allen (R-VA), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burns (R-MT), Nay
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Campbell (R-CO), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Corzine (D-NJ), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Yea
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Nay
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Edwards (D-NC), Not Voting
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Nay
Frist (R-TN), Nay
Graham (D-FL), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagel (R-NE), Nay
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Jeffords (I-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Miller (D-GA), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Nay
Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Sununu (R-NH), Nay
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
I have some video of O’Reilly and Jeff Beatty, apparently best buds, at the Agawam picnic. I thought it’d be fun to set it to music. I don’t quite get why the “True Democrat” seems to be so tight with the Republicans, but whatever… Seems you can’t embed video in comments here, but the clip is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
If it walks like a chicken and talks like a chicken, it’s a chicken. Kerry’s refusal to participate in an open democratic process by debating his worthy primary opponent is helping me to decide that I will place my vote with O’Reilly.
President Nixon on Vietnam, Reagan on arming the Contras illegally, and the entire power elite to investigate the corruption and money laundering of BCCI a “chicken” is pathetic. These were tougher than debating anyone, especially when he is the best debater in the country in either party.
<
p>He is debating O’Reilly. There is nothing in the constitution of either MA or the US that requires it. The MA Democratic party doesn’t require it AND he is debating O’Reilly.
“Shut up, look what he did in the war! We’re all lucky he’s even consenting to a debate!”
<
p>I’ve heard that talk a lot over the last week, but not from people I respect….
The person I responded to inaccurately said he wouldn’t debate – which is untrue. Now, I’ve seen you praise HRC and she actually refused to debate a similarly weak primary opponent. I never called her a chicken. It was a political decision in her case not to debate someone with no chance of winning.
<
p>He also said it was because he was “chicken” – which is crazy – both based on his history and I listed FOUR things, not just that he was a war hero. The chicken comment was uncalled for and I chose to respond rather than rate it as it deserves. Your hatred is showing.
Wow. Just…wow.
“I’ve heard that talk a lot over the last week, but not from people I respect… “
<
p>Frankly, I think it was uncalled for.
I just watched a national convention built around the idea that if somebody is a war hero, they’re above questions about their policy choices. I was shocked to see that line of reasoning offered by a supporter of a Democratic candidate. In any case, I can’t imagine ever thinking that anything I say would ever inspire hatred…I’m just a guy who blogs.
KarenC said it was crazy to call a war hero ‘chicken’. You twisted that to claim she said a war hero shouldn’t have to debate.
<
p>KarenC said you were showing hatred. You twisted that to claim she said you inspire hatred.
<
p>Willfully misrepresenting what someone said is a tactic straight out of the Republican playbook.
their policy choices.
<
p>1) Even when the comment was posted, Kerry was committed to debating – in fact, I think he is doing it today.
<
p>2) Ignoring that he is debating, not debating does NOT mean not answering questions. Kerry has been interviewed here in Massachusetts and nationally on political choices. There is no important subject I can think of where it is not possible to find a Kerry response on. (There are valid political reasons not to debate a marginal candidate – I do not think HRC was “chicken” not to debate Tasini, but a debate could have led to something that could be not helpful in her intended run.)
<
p>I did not say that you inspire hatred. Your comment intentionally attacked me by linking me to the worst of the Republican party. There is nothing I ever posted that justifies that – and I would not have posted that of you.
<
p>You could have merely disagreed with my contention that Kerry does not deserve being called a chicken by someone who very likely can’t match the courage Kerry has shown over decades. You also greatly distort my comment that gives as much weight to Kerry’s investigations and his standing up to Nixon. Not to mention, HE ALREADY AGREED TO DEBATE O’Reilly.
that never seems to get out in the media.
<
p>surfing a little down in this thread I see Boston Magazine is brought up. I dont know if you have lived in Boston/MA very long but keep in mind that Boston Magazine is a favorite of Massachusetts conservatives. They hate Kerry and always have. They have good entertainment and restaurant writing. In a way the reporting is more conservative than the Herald or the Tribune/Daily newspapers on local politics because it is the insiders like John Rodriquez contributing. Insider stuff, antiliberal, and glossy
I appreciate your telling me that. I only moved to Somerville earlier this year, and I didn’t know Boston Magazine.