BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 06:21 PM

The man comes across, on the news bites I've seen, as even more boring than Gore. That needn't necessarily be all that important. It just means.if he's the candidate, that he will be depending on the votes of people who are voting against Bush, rather than for Kerry as such.

There's a saying "Oppositions don't win elections. Govermments lose them."

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Charley Noble
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 05:40 PM

Well, Nerd, do continue dishing this up. I'm probably gonna hear more of it raised in the future as more people become involved in this campaign. I fully expect the Republican operatives to be using some of your own best arguments. I'm undecided whether your points really have merit but I welcome the alert and the links.

I do worry about your candidate, Howard Dean. I was extremely disappointed with the outcome of his campaign in Iowa and now he's only my favorite candidate for a new episode of West Wing. Dean went in to Iowa with many advantages that a campaign could wish for but he lost decisively. I wouldn't blame his loss on an over zealous media, although they surely played a minor role. What's your best explanation?

Dean's best chance for regaining momentum may be Michigan.

Charley Noble
Democratic Town Chair in Richmond, Maine

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 04:23 PM

Good work nerd! These post illustrate just how conflicted and cooptable Kerry is, and what an easy target he will be... and raises the legitimate concern that he may be a media set up. They are suspiciously silent about Kerry's foibles right now... He might be a sitting duck when the media says "its time"... Bush is just as conflicted, and more of the same contradictions and hypocracy we don't need. I could imagine the fiscal conservatives dumping Bush and picking up Kerry... If Bush keeps flushing...
ttr

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 03:08 PM

From today's Washington Post:


Kerry Leads in Lobby Money
Anti-Special-Interest Campaign Contrasts With Funding

Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who has made a fight against corporate special interests a centerpiece of his front-running campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, has raised more money from paid lobbyists than any other senator over the past 15 years, federal records show.

Kerry, a 19-year veteran of the Senate who fought and won four expensive political campaigns, has received nearly $640,000 from lobbyists, many representing telecommunications and financial companies with business before his committee, according to Federal Election Commission data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

For his presidential race, Kerry has raised more than $225,000 from lobbyists, better than twice as much as his nearest Democratic rival.


(...)

Kerry, who did not begin his campaign with a heavy emphasis on fighting lobbyists, appears to have usurped the special interest message from Edwards and Dean over the past few months. Now, Kerry's standard campaign refrain includes this warning to the "special interests" and their lobbyists: "We're coming, you're going and don't let the door hit you on the way out."

(...)

One of Kerry's biggest -- and perhaps most controversial -- donors has been the Boston-based law firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo. The group, which lobbies on behalf of the telecommunications industry -- and employs the senator's brother, Cameron -- is his single largest contributor over the course of his Senate career. David Leiter, Kerry's former chief of staff, is vice president of a lobbying company affiliated with the Boston-based law firm.

The Center for Public Integrity criticized the senator's relationship with the firm in a little-publicized report released last year, accusing him of pushing the agenda of those helping to pay his bills.

"Kerry, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, has sponsored or co-sponsored a number of bills favorable to the industry and has written letters to government agencies on behalf of the clientele of his largest donor," the report said. The Boston law firm's client include the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association (CTIA), an umbrella group for telecommunications companies.

Since 1999, Kerry has sponsored at least two bills and co-sponsored half a dozen that were sought by the CTIA, including industry-backed plans for winning lucrative auctions of spectrum, or airwaves. Thomas Wheeler, the former chief executive of the CTIA, and Christopher Putala, a lobbyist for the group, are both among Kerry's biggest presidential fundraisers.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 02:27 PM

From the Arizona Republic:

Kerry ranks second in the Senate in all-time missed vote percentage. Only Zell Miller of Georgia has skipped a greater proportion of his votes than Kerry. Edwards is third and Lieberman is fourth. For this they get taxpayer money?

When you think about the fact that Lieberman was a vice-presidential candidate last time out and a presidential candidate this time, it's impressive that Kerry could surpass him in this statistic of lameness.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 12:36 PM

I got this off the Kerry website:

Kerry Statement on Dean and Gephardt's Position to Raise Taxes on Middle Class


January 07, 2004

For Immediate Release


There is an important issue that has long been a fundamental difference in the campaign: raising taxes on the middle class. Cutting middle class taxes is a core value for me, and it's been a bedrock position of mine in the campaign. I strongly disagree with anyone who would raise taxes on the middle class.

Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt want to increase their taxes.

(...)

The rest is a bunch of lies about how Dean and Gephardt's plans would affect middle class taxes. It achieves its spin by ignoring everything except federal income taxes, ignoring the fact that when these go down and revenues to the states go down, and funding for education and health care goes down, you pay more in other taxes to make up for it. So while we pay less in Federal Income Taxes, we pay more in Taxes.

This is how Bush got away with the tax cuts in the first place, and Kerry has played right into his hands.

So, Frank, don't claim that Kerry "didn't make it look like Dean and Gephardt were for 'raising taxes' on the middle class." That's exactly what he did. He did it deliberately and repeatedly, and said it in so many words. You just had to be paying attention for more than three weeks to hear about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 11:35 AM

He didn't make it look like Dean and Gephardt were for "raising taxes" on the middle class.

Frank, where were you? For months, and at least two of the televised debates, Kerry said, in exactly these words, "Dean and Gephardt want to raise taxes on the middle class." Thus, the "vituperatve rhetoric" that will lose this election for the Democrats has come directly out of Kerry's own mouth.

Honestly, it appears to me that you just began watching these guys two weeks ago.

Big Mick, there's one thing you can be sure of. If political operatives like Rove and Cheney SAY that they are salivating at the prospect of a Dean candidacy (which they are saying), then they are lying. They're lying precisely so it will scare Democrats into voting for a candidate they perceive as "safe." Like Kerry. One of the first rules of politics: don't take advice from your enemy.

Remember, it was Kerry who was Dukakis's lieutenant governor, and Clark who is trotting McGovern around as an endorser. We'll surely see that rhetoric used on either or both of them.

In other News, The New York Times reports today That Kerry and Edwards, new converts to populism in the last three weeks, accept more money than any of the other democrats from corporate special interests, then hypocritically declare themselves to be against corporate special interests in their speeches. In fact, much of Kerry's money comes from industries he supposedly regulates as a Senator (Sounds crooked to me...):

While Senator John Kerry regularly promises to stand up to "big corporations," his campaign has taken money from executives on Wall Street and those representing the telecommunications industry, which is under his purview in Congress. Mr. Kerry denounces President Bush for catering to the rich, but he has depended more heavily on affluent donors than the other leading Democrats except for another populist, Senator John Edwards.

(...)

Mr. Kerry is an experienced fund-raiser, having worked to
raise money while on the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee and for his own campaigns. In his campaign for
the nomination, he has collected more than $1 million from
employees of securities and investment businesses. He took
in $70,000 from employees of Citigroup and $62,500 from
workers at Goldman Sachs, according to the Center for
Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks
campaign finance trends.

Kerry's top career donor is the law firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo, according to a study by Chuck Lewis, executive director of another campaign-finance group, the Center for Public Integrity. Mr. Kerry received $231,000 over the course of his career from lawyers in the firm, where his brother, Cameron F. Kerry, is a telecommunications lawyer.

The firm has represented clients like the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association and AT&T Wireless Services, whose industry falls under the jurisdiction of a Senate subcommittee that includes Mr. Kerry, the report said.

(...)

Mr. Kerry has criticized the current "creed of greed" and
faulted Mr. Bush letting "the privileged ride high and reap
the rewards." But his typical donors share at least one
similarity with the president's, an ability to give $2,000,
the legal maximum.

Fifty-five percent of Mr. Kerry's money has come from
donors giving $2,000. For Mr. Bush, the comparable figure
is 73 percent, according to the Center for Responsive
Politics.

The center's analysis shows that small donors, those giving
$200 or less, have provided 12 percent of Mr. Kerry's
campaign money, the same percentage they provided for Mr.
Bush.

Mr. Edwards collected even less, 3 percent, of his campaign
money from contributions of $200 or less, the analysis
showed. In his stump speech about "the two Americas," Mr.
Edwards promises to protect ordinary citizens against the
wealthy and the powerful. But 65 percent of the money in
his campaign has come from Americans who are able to donate
$2,000 or more, chiefly lawyers, according to the research
group.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 10:29 AM

I have been following this thread with great interest. I find Frank's take on things to be clearly thought out.

I think Dr. Dean has changed the nature of this campaign, and brought a message that is necessary. And he is not out of this. Unfortunately, I think he ought to be. I do not say this because I don't like him. I do. But this is the veteran political operative speaking. If Dean gets the nomination, the opposition will "McGovernize" him so quickly, that there will be no hope of winning. And as I said last fall, winning this thing is the most important thing. He has a couple of things working against him. First, it is always an error to peak to soon. Second, he has allowed the opposition to define him. They are literally salivating at him being the candidate. Think George McGovern and Michael Dukakis. The latter point is not always fatal. But it usually is.

In his favor, he has brought new people to the campaign, but historically that is not a major advantage, if the majority of the support does not come from the traditional "base". The base voters are the ones that go out and vote every time. He has drawn some of these, but many others are unsure about him. Remember that the hardest thing to get average folks to do is to change status quo. If they are edgy about it, when they are in the privacy of that booth, most of the time they will vote to stay with status quo unless status quo is unbearable.

This is shaping up to be a very interesting primary season.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 10:13 AM

" So by essentially lying, in order to make it look like Dean and Gephardt were for "raising taxes on the middle class," he's given Bush that issue too."

I don't call this a lie.   That's the kind of vituperative rhetoric that will hand this election to Bush. Why is it that Democrats are always shooting themselves in the feet. His point is as a senator, you have to decide which part of the bill is valid and that which is not.   He didn't make it look like Dean and Gephardt were for "raising taxes" on the middle class. He merely pointed out that there are two sides to the issue.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 10:08 AM

Hi Nerd,

Kerry explained how bills get through congress. They are laden with all kinds of booby traps and a congressman has to decide which is good or bad in the bill and go accordingly. There is no such thing as a great bill. Competently written resolutions are not found often in politics.

I think it's OK to take a man at his word until it is proven otherwise. If he lies, then you know. In the meantime, it's naive to think that there is the perfect competently written bill.

" In order to distinguish himself from Dean and Gephardt, Kerry has argued again and again that Bush's tax cuts were GOOD for the middle class, but BETTER for the rich, and therefore we need to keep some of them. "

No. He argues that the rich are the beneficiaries and that there should be tax cuts for the middle class.

The tax cuts did help only the wealthy under Bush.

"The problem is, the middle class will not be mobilized against something that's good for them just because it's better for someone else."

This is political spin. It's the kind of glittering generality that defines most propaganda.

More later.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 04:38 AM

By the way, all through this campaign, Dean's focus has been on "we," "us" and even more commonly, "you."

"You have the power to take back your country, you have the power to change your party, and together we have the power to take back the White House in 2004, and that's exactly what we're gonna do. Thank you! Thank You! You have the power!"

is the way he ended every stump speech for a year. "You have the Power" is still Dean's biggest slogan, along with its Spanish version "Si Se Puede." (Dean is the only candidate fluent in Spanish. He picked it up working on a farm in Florida where all the other workers were Cuban refugees.)

Kerry's mantra was "In the Senate, I led the fight." It was I, I, I for a year. Kerry's adoption of populist rhetoric and "we" is another thing he took directly from Dean. Frank's observation that Kerry seldom says I sounds like someone who turns on a football game in the last five minutes, just after a dramatic turnaround that gives the advantage to Green Bay for the first time, they run out the clock, and he says "wow, Green Bay really dominated that game." I've been watching these guys closely for a long time. They're dramatically different than even four weeks ago, and Kerry was not a "we" kind of guy.

One of the nice things about having supported Dean all along, actually, is that even if my candidate doesn't win, he has so profoundly set the terms of this campaign that his opponents are very different people because of him. All the good things about Kerry and Edwards, their newfound populism and inclusive rhetoric, are borrowed from Dean. Edwards even uses "you have the power." CNN's Mark Shields, along with other journalists, have been making this point for the last few days. Whoever wins, there will be a little bit of Howard Dean in the nominee.

But I fear that if Kerry wins the nomination, it'll be nothing but Bush for four more years.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 05:28 PM

Kerry nails New Hampshire
Clinton nails interns (allegedly)

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: DougR
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 04:34 PM

SRS: No, the article I referred to was strictly about Kerry.

Jaze: No, I wouldn't vote for Dean (perish the thought). I think Bush's victory will be greater if he faces Dean rather than Kerry.

Nerd: flattery will get you no where! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 04:15 PM

Frank, you're looking at Kerry through Rose-Colored Glasses. He attacked his rivals plenty in all the debates until he was the front runner. Dean and Gephardt "wanted to raise taxes on the middle class," etc.

His operatives conducted not only ad hominem attacks but many dirty tricks in Iowa and New Hampshire. He had robo-callers calling Dean voters (what they refer to as "ones" or strong supporters). They claimed to be from the Dean campaign, and "reminded" the voters to caucus, then gave the wrong address. In New Hampshire, where the address is less crucial (you can't show up late in Iowa) he had robo-callers calling undecided voters, claiming to be for Dean. The calls were made between 2AM and 4 AM, pissing off the recipients so they wouldn't vote for Dean. (NB: Although there is no proof it was Kerry who did this, no one else had much to gain in New Hampshire, and the Republicans do not have the pollsters on the ground to identify who is a Dean "one." Because of this Joe Trippi, Dean's erstwhile manager, is sure it was Kerry).

Your claim that "The "insider" "outsider" thing is a red herring now that Dean has a new crew." is absurd. Dean is the candidate, not Roy Neel. If I have a Hollywood insider working for me, does that make me a Hollywood insider? Dean needs Neel's experience on the ground in the remaining primary states. But his money still comes from large, large numbers of people giving him $100 each. If we elect him, he will be the first president in living memory who is beholden to the middle class, not rich special interests, for funding his campaign. THAT's what the outsider thing is about.

Kerry's vision is whatever the polls say is popular. He wasn't arguing against the war until recently, he wasn't mentioning special interests and corporate cronyism. All of that he picked up from the Dean campaign. When it played well, he stole it.

Kerry also does plenty of rah-rah and fist pounding. "I have three words for George W. Bush: Bring! It! On!" Or how about: I have a message for the current occupants of the White House. We're Coming! You're Going! And Don't let the Door Hit You on the Way Out!"

Kerry may have the "air of a statesman" now, but so did Gore and it did not help him. So does Dean, but the media focuses on individual moments which are unstatesmanlike and plays them over and over. So far they have given Kerry a free pass. That will not last forever.

Kerry is a dead end for the Democratic party. If he wins the nomination, start making "Hillary in '08" signs.

Finally, here's an article from ABCnews.com's The Note:


For months, when Dean was riding high, Team Kerry regularly cried in its Heinekens over the the failure of the press to hold Dean accountable for statements and actions present and past.

Of course, Dean's fall was accompanied by a level of scrutiny that at times bordered on the absurd - and often represented shifting and inconsistent standards.

The press too often keys off of the political combatants to decide what to go after and what not to, but for reasons that will be much discussed at Harvard in 2005, this week at least, John Kerry can do no wrong.

If Kerry were being treated like Dean was when Dean was the frontrunner (assuming any of you can remember that far back), these things would be monster flaps and areas of aggressive reportage:

Kerry saying "North Korea" instead of "South Korea" in the debate.

Kerry limiting his press availabilities.

Kerry "borrowing" aspects of Dean's message.

Kerry's record of legislative accomplishments (?).

Fritz Hollings using the word "Chinaman" at a Kerry event yesterday and Kerry not denouncing him.

Kerry bragging about his campaign finance record in the face of taking presidential PAC money, DSCC record, and Busta Caps.

Kerry claiming "endorsements don't matter" and then saying "We got Hollings and Mondale!" and, today, the League of Conservation Voters (and more are coming ... ).

Kerry's apparently limited release of his tax returns.

Kerry showing an unpresidential temper in flipping out at kindly David Wade.

Kerry's team putting his traveling press corps at a different hotel than the candidate.

Kerry not being attacked at the debate and there being almost no pickup for his Vietnam medals answer.

Luis Navarro's quitting after yesterday's hiring of Steve Elmendorf.

A million other Kerry controversies that have been chronicled in the Boston papers over the years and clips on which exist in a bulging RNC file.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 03:34 PM

Kerry's problems:

1) Kerry voted for a resolution that gave Bush the power to go into Iraq unilaterally. It doesn't really matter why he did it, because no one with half a brain would have trusted Bush at that point. To say, "Bush SAID he'd get international cooperation, and HE DIDN'T" is lame, lame, lame. It's openly admitting you got outwitted by Bush on this issue. It also exposes the flaws of the resolution itself. A competently written resolution would NOT have let Bush break his promises.

Think about it: did YOU expect Bush to get international cooperation before going in? I didn't, and neither did Dean, Kucinich, etc.

2)Kerry voted for No Child Left Behind, and now acts as if he opposed it, or claims that the problems are in how Bush implemented it. But again, if the bill were soundly constructed it would not give Bush the leeway to implement it wrongly. Like the war resolution, this is a case of voting for a bad bill that lets the republicans do what they want.

3) Kerry voted for the Patriot Act, but now argues that it's bad for civil liberties. See above.

4) In order to distinguish himself from Dean and Gephardt, Kerry has argued again and again that Bush's tax cuts were GOOD for the middle class, but BETTER for the rich, and therefore we need to keep some of them.

(In fact, as Dean has pointed out, the Federal tax cuts the middle class saw were swallowed up by higher state and payroll taxes, and higher insurance premiums and education costs which all resulted from Bush's tax cuts. So the tax cuts really helped ONLY the wealthy. The USA Today ran an article just yesterday completely vindicating Dean on this--the middle class's taxes went UP under Bush.)

The problem is, the middle class will not be mobilized against something that's good for them just because it's better for someone else. So by essentially lying, in order to make it look like Dean and Gephardt were for "raising taxes on the middle class," he's given Bush that issue too.

5) Kerry missed the vote on the new corporate "prescription drug benefit." He claims he "fought tooth and nail" against it, but in the end decided that campaigning for his own future was more important than voting on Medicare's.

So on these specific issues, he has no moral authority to stand up to Bush. Bush will simply say "if you opposed my plans so much, why did you vote for them? If you hated the medicare bill so much, why didn't you vote against it?" AND BUSH WILL BE RIGHT.

How about general issues? Well, Kerry's voting record in general is spotty. He misses a lot of votes. But when he DOES vote, he is to the left of Ted Kennedy, and even to the left of our only socialist congressman, Bernie Sanders of Vermont. So the Bush team can paint a picture of a left-wing extremist.

Then there are the character issues, which are unbelievable. In the 1970s, Kerry married a rich heiress, Julia Thorne, and had two kids. He then left his family. He philandered for several years with Hollywood starlets, all while still married with kids. Then he set his sights on his current wife, an even richer heiress. She made him try to get his first marriage annulled--despite the children! So he has publicly declared that his kids are meaningless, along with the marriage that produced them, all for a chance at Theresa Heinz and her family's fortune.

Do you see this as "presidential?" "electable?" All these half-baked ideas which are used against Dean make Kerry even LESS desirable. He will be a pushover for the Republicans to take out on the character issues alone. Think his Viet Nam service will save him? Remember Al Gore. Remember Max Cleland. Bush's guys are vicious.

How about this? Kerry has taken out a six million dollar mortgage on his portion of the family mansion. He claims he will pay this back himself, out of his own money. But on his salary, that would be literally impossible, even if he were elected president--it would cost more in a year than he makes. In fact, his wife's fortune will have to be used to pay it off. So the whole mortgage was a dodge around the election rules, which prevented her from giving him the money. He simply borrows against his house, and she pays it back.   

Do you think the Republicans will miss this kind of thing?

Kerry is a smorgasbord of flaws and bad behavior that the republicans can exploit and expand upon. And if the corporate media are consistent, they'll keep bowing before Kerry until he's clinched the nomination, then turn against him so they can elect Bush II. At least with Dean, all the skeletons are out of the closet, and any "doubts about Dean" stories will be old news.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 02:14 PM

Kerry hasn't been lazy. It's damned hard to pass a decent bill
in congress. Is he status quo? That's a matter of labeling.

Here's what he's got going for him. He's on focus. Doesn't talk about his organization or what he's going to do in the various
states. He seldom uses the word "I". It's mostly "we".
He is clear and concise in his statements and reserves all
of his criticism for Bush. He hasn't attacked any of his
fellow candidates. He doesn't have time for that crap.

He has his own convictions about what should be done and doesn't
follow Dean implicitly. Kerry voted for the Iraq resolution
because he believed the UN would be involved and international
cooperation would be there. That's what Bush promised. He lied.

Kerry has the air of a statesman. If he makes it to president,
I'll wager that he has the respect of the European community
in the same way that JFK had.

Kerry's anger is tempered by a quiet and logical approach to
politics. No rah rah or fist pounding. He stays with the issues. and No ad hominems. No attack ads for fellow candidates either.
(What about Dean and Gephardt in Iowa?) See, the problem is that
Democrats keep shooting themselves in the feet. It's time for
a party unity and not the pseudo-centrist approach of Lieberman.
Guess what? There is no centrist anymore. What the news pundits
refer to when they speak of centrist is more Bush-speak. The center has moved Right.

I don't agree with Kerry about the Iraq resolution. But I think
he can beat Bush in style as well as content. I don't think he's doing enough to win African-American or Latino voters. That could change. Can he win the South? We'll just have to see.

The General made a faux-pas at New Hampshire U where he informed
the students that they would be hearing from their local recruiter.
It was a joke I guess but didn't go over too well.

The "insider" "outsider" thing is a red herring now that Dean
has a new crew.

Eventually the Bush vitriol runs dry and then you have to elect
someone who doesn't trade on Bush-hating but on a vision for
America. I hear that in Kerry's message.

Some of it may have come from Dean but it was there with Kerry
at the beginning too.

Being electable has to do with being a skilled politician. I think Kerry is.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: jaze
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 09:58 PM

DougR, are you suggesting you'd vote for Dean? Or that GWB stands a better chance of getting re-elected against him?

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 04:32 PM

Oops. Looks like I made a mistake. Kerry actually HAS introduced legislation. But I still think he's been a pretty lazy Senator with a sense of entitlement.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 12:09 PM

Good points, Nerd.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Nerd
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 11:42 AM

DougR, you're being a blowhard.

Kerry "leans" much further to the left than Dean. When he actually turns up to vote (which is not that often), his voting record is to the left of Kennedy's. When he introduces legislation...oh, wait a minute, he's never introduced a single piece of legislation in all his time in the Senate. What the hell does he do, anyway? He is basically a status quo candidate, the worst the Democratic Party has to offer, with no particular vision. Dean has governed vermont as a centrist and a fiscal conservative. The only really liberal part of his record was his support of civil rights for gay people.

By the way, the finish in NH represented 13 delegates for Kerry, 9 for Dean, a difference of 4 delegates. When you need over 2,000 delegates to win, this is an inconsequential number, one fifth of a percent of the delegates needed. Due to the early commitments of "superdelegates," Dean is STILL in the lead in the delegate race. Don't count him out yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 08:04 PM

Thanks Michealr... included in you accurate disclosure of the "Skull and Bones" was a great gift! and... I didn't know that Kerry was one of those boys...

There is still a sneaking suspicion that Kerry is just doing what works for the other candidates... I wonder what he would do if it was all up to him?

Cheerio! ttr

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: michaelr
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 07:40 PM

It looks like I'm gonna have to keep saying this until it sinks in around here:

Kerry is no alternative to Bush. He belongs to the same secret society - Skull and Bones - as the Resident and his father and grandfather before him. He's part of the same agenda as the Bushes, which is control of the country, and has been for 150 years.

Now if you think this is just some Yale fraternity, think again. A book by Alexandra Robbins, "Secrets of the Tomb", traces the connections between this elite club and the powerful players in American politics, industry and finance. Here is an excerpt of the book, and here is an interview with the author.

From this site:
"Every year on a Thursday in May fifteen juniors are "tapped"—initiated into next year's group. There have been a few irregular initiations and member years—usually because of war. Around 2,500 people have been members, mostly white males from old-line inter-related, wealthy New England families. Bundy, Bush, Ford, Goodyear, Harriman, Heinz, Jay, Kellogg, Lord, Lovett, Perkins, Phelps, Pillsbury, Pinchot, Rockefeller, Sloane, Stimson, Taft, Vanderbilt, Weyerhaeuser, and Whitney, are some of the names on the Skull and Bones roster. Minorities were brought in during the 1950's and female initiates were allowed into the Order in 1991.

"Members of Order of Skull and Bones have had a great impact upon our society. "They" have friends in very high and—very low places. They occupy key positions in the worlds of commerce, communications, diplomacy, education, espionage, finance, law and politics. Their impact on professional associations and the philanthropical fortune-holding/controlling foundations has been very profound.

"There have been two Skull and Bones Presidents [GWB is the third]; at least ten Senators; two Chief Justices of the Supreme Court and many U.S. representatives and state governors. "Bonesmen" have held a myriad of lesser appointed posts and positions, with a particular affinity for Secretary of War/Defense; diplomatic posts to Europe, Russia, China and the Philippines; and in the national security state/intelligence apparatus."

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 05:21 PM

Is this the article you mean? Dated Jan. 27.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: DougR
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 03:33 PM

There was an interesting column by David Brooks in the New York Times today about Kerry. If I could do a "blue clicky" I'd provide if for you.

I'm still hoping Dean will get the nomination, but I fear the Democratic "establishment" led by Teddy Kennedy won't hear of it. Although the "establishment" leans far to the left, they know that a candidate who leans even further left will not be elected this time around.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 01:04 PM

Kerry can't carry the south. Edwards can

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 09:50 AM

Dubya IS doing a great job--if you're a rich republican or a defense contractor or you're a big business who wants those pesky environmental protections out of the way or if you don't want to be obligated to pay your middle class employees overtime or if you're a federal employee who doesn't care that your cost of living increas has been trimmed each year so Dubya can give that money to his much-higher paid appointees . .

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Pseudolus
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 09:11 AM

I have not joined in the Bush Bashing that tends to go on around here not because I think he's doing a great job but because it does little to make me feel better. Nevertheless, for the first time in my life I am patiently waiting for the outcome of the Democratic primaries to determine which candidate I will vote for. I suspect it will be Kerry although I'm not ruling Dean out yet. Pretty sad state of affairs if you ask me.......


Frank


P.S. Did I really just post to a political thread? Sheesh! :)

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 08:26 AM

Scary, but not surprising. Weasels ascendant. Someone who can lie almost as effortlessly as the Shrub, with a "Bush Lite" outlook and agenda. I'd rather have a Democrat in the White House.

{says he, accepting that he may have to hold his nose & vote for the weasel)

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 07:23 AM

Dan Rather and Wolf Blitzer both had to hem and haw about this, as Dean turned them topsy-turvy!

The unofficial returns in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire on Tuesday: with 97 percent of precincts reporting, Kerry had 39 percent, Dean had 26 percent, Clark 12 percent, Edwards 12 percent and Lieberman 9 percent.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 01:28 AM

IMO, Dean will stand up to Bush a lot better than Kerry. And, damn the media for calling it all ahead of time and making it sound as though it's all done and sewn up with just TWO states in!

kat

Subject: BS: Kerry nails New Hampshire
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 12:31 AM

Kerry, having won New Hampshire, takes on a new role in the race for the Democratic nomination... as the 'strong favorite'. How do you feel about Kerry? Can he keep this momentum? Do you think he's for real?

As an aside... I'm of the opinion that he's as close to Gore as we could ever find... Perhaps it's a bit of Karma... But in all fairness, he is loosening up!

Will he stand up to Bush?
ttr