BS: Popular Views of John Kerry

Subject: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 11:26 PM

In an interesting and penetrating article, William R. Pitt seeks to examine attributes of Kerry's character not usually discussed in the press.

Full article at http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/093004A.shtml

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 11:27 PM

Thanks for the links, Amos.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 11:32 PM

Kerry Is Widely Favored Abroad
  By Keith B. Richburg
  The Washington Post

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/093004Y.shtml

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 12:02 AM

But unfortunately being favored abroad is not going to help Kerry here. Some of the more xenophobic will actually hold it against him. However, I suppose they're already stalwart Bushites.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 11:24 AM

Previous John Kerry thread here.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 04:59 PM

I thought it read more like a testimonial than a biography. For a more balanced biography, I suggest reading the the Boston Globe Kerry biography.

Or if you don't have time and inclination to read the book, try the Boston Globe's week long series on Kerry published in June 2003 as he began his run for president.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 03:04 PM

Marjorie Cohn commends Kerry's argument against Bush's duplicity in "Kerry Hits the Nail on the Head"

Intersting read.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: curmudgeon
Date: 05 Oct 04 - 07:31 AM

For another honest look at John Kerry, go here.
Film maker George Butler, best known for his film "Pumping Iron" which gave rise to Arnold the Barbarian's fame, has a new film about Kerry. You should find this interview very interesting. NB, it's about a half hour listening time -- Tom

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 11:50 PM

Like many progressives, I've spent much of the election season unenthused about Senator Kerry. There were even times that I questioned supporting him at all – perhaps the boomerang effect from a second Bush term would catapult us further forward in the long term.  Or so I mused.  In the primaries, I championed Dennis Kucinich, who embodied ideals I had rarely seen in a politician.  Following the primaries, I grieved the deafness of the Democratic Party to his message, resigning myself to a long wait for the changes that I really wanted.  
 
Eventually, after the nomination was secured, I focused on efforts that would build the long-term progressive movement as well as undermine Bush and his cabal.  I could not feign enthusiasm by campaigning for Kerry but I was happy to work on discrediting Bush. This stance has been actively celebrated by Democrats this year with the motto of Anybody But Bush. However, there has been a problem in this logic, since Americans are, at root, an optimistic and forward-looking people.  To vote for negative reasons runs against the grain of our national character.  We need someone to celebrate.  We need someone we can champion.  We need someone who expresses our ideals. A hero is far more enduring, compelling, and motivating than a villain.
 
This week, much to my surprise, I am having a conversion experience to truly supporting Kerry. This is not because I agree with him on every point of policy.  Or because he fully shares my views on things like the Iraq war.  I certainly haven't been convinced by the Democratic Party's propaganda machine – there is plenty there that needs reform as well.  
 
I have been won over by the greatness I am beginning to see in Kerry's soul.
 
The first intimations for me came in the debate on Thursday, when Kerry revealed himself as a noble warrior: powerful, resolute, and clear-thinking, a stark contrast to the incoherent repetitiveness of Bush.  As Kerry spoke, I was inspired.  His performance was enough to motivate me to see the movie Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry.
 
This movie is extraordinary for one reason: it shines with the soul power of a man playing out a courageous role in history.  We witness a 27 year old veteran, speaking before a key Senate subcommittee with depth of insight, courage of conviction, and purposeful patriotism. He spoke the conscience of a nation. To reach that point, John endured bullets and the madness of an unjust war, a war he had gone to fight with the noblest of intentions.  He then endured the bullets of silence, neglect, and shame that hit the veterans upon return.  Instead of succumbing to drink or denial, he took on an almost unthinkably difficult task: to change the opinions of a nation and convince powerful forces in Washington that they had erred.  He risked his planned career in politics to take this stand.
 
It is a mark of greatness when, in moments of moral darkness, a man or woman chooses to risk future, friends, and social standing to do what is right.  Life often presents this dichotomy – we can choose the safer path, or we can choose the heroic path, which may cost us everything.  When John Kerry was faced with this choice as a man of 27, he chose the heroic path and the effect from that decision sends ripples of benefit forward to today.
 
Throughout the movie, John's quietly powerful presence emanates from videos, stills, and speeches.  The testimonials of those who knew him are filled with extraordinary respect.  He reveals himself as a natural leader.  In watching this chronicle, I began to see his aloofness in a different light.  I began to see it as watchfulness, patience, and moral clarity - a Lincolnesque seriousness that derives from a heartfelt sense of right and wrong. His is the demeanor of principled conviction rather than the charm of a snake-oil salesman.  
 
His steady, courageous hand was evident in the stories of those who served with him on the Swift Boats, a particularly maddening and dangerous duty.  Later, in his work with veterans, he built the movement to end the war without rancor, counseling patience and easing hot tempers, preventing violence at every step.  He won people over by demonstrating the moral high ground.   When he threw his own medals over the fence, a powerful act of protest with hundreds of his brothers, he quietly stated that he was opposed to no one.  
 
Vietnam was many things to America but perhaps more than anything it was the first great public mistake of a maturing nation.  For that war, we paid a heavy price.  John Kerry, at a young age, presciently saw that America needed to learn deep, important lessons from that mistake.  He knew, even then, that we had not fully learned the lesson we needed to learn.  Thus the war continues, the war of truth and justice and facing the shadow side of our power.  If we are lucky, it will continue with him as our President.
 
Even diehard Republicans would be challenged to watch this movie and not be impressed with the heroism of John Kerry as a young man.  The hot fires of Vietnam and its aftermath were the forge that created the steel of his character.  Out of it came a man committed to do the right thing.  Bush's life of privilege, protection, and frivolousness during the same era could not stand in starker contrast.  The mettle of these two men was revealed early.
 
If elected, Kerry may not get us out of the war in Iraq immediately.  It may take time.  But I believe that the experiences that were seared into him in Vietnam ensure that he understands the full price of every life and limb that is lost and that he will not take his duties as commander in chief lightly, much less be afraid to admit our mistakes.  Integrity and honesty can end the war far more quickly than Bush's braggadocio.
 
Going Upriver reveals a young man whose greatness is beginning to shine.  If we elect John Kerry President, I now believe that his character will likely produce a presidency that we can rank as one of the great ones.   If you have been ambivalent about Kerry, I urge you to see this movie and see what he is really made of beyond sound bites and political ads. This man was tested and he stood as an example of great courage.

Permanent link: http://www.stephendinan.com/2004/10/converting-to-kerry.html

Stephen Dinan [e-mail] is author of Radical Spirit (New World Library, 2002), and founder of TCN, Inc. Stephen directed and helped to create the Esalen Institute's Center for Theory & Research, a think tank for leading scholars, researchers, and teachers to explore human potential frontiers. Currently, he is a marketing consultant for a number of startups, political action groups, and non-profits and runs workshops through the Radical Spirit Community.  For a full archive of his articles, visit www.stephendinan.com

 

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 12:00 AM

Kerry:

"I have a plan". What plan? "I have a plan".


Old guy

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Nerd
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 01:39 AM

Old Guy: "Kerry Sucks"

Why does he suck?

OG: "Kerry Sucks"

But why vote for Bush?

OG: "Kerry Sucks."

But what about the economy?

OG: "Kerry Sucks."

But how about the fact that we went to war under false pretences?

OG: "Kerry Sucks."

It's Old Guy's one-note symphony again!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 03:13 AM

Noid:

Play us one on your meat whistle.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 09:43 PM

The influential Washington Post came to day with an endorsement recommending that John Kerry be elected President of the United States

"In 2000, Mr. Bush justifiably criticized his predecessor for failing to deal with the looming problems of Social Security and Medicare. In office, though, he has been equally delinquent, even as the day of reckoning drew closer. He championed a huge new entitlement for Medicare without insisting on the cost-cutting reforms that everyone knows are needed."

...

"We do not view a vote for Mr. Kerry as a vote without risks. But the risks on the other side are well known, and the strengths Mr. Kerry brings are considerable. He pledges both to fight in Iraq and to reach out to allies; to hunt down terrorists, and to engage without arrogance the Islamic world. These are the right goals, and we think Mr. Kerry is the better bet to achieve them."

---

If Kerry wins the Washington Post AND the New York Times his probability for a Presidency increase considerably. Even without the Crawford Iconoclast's recommendation!

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 04:32 AM

Kerry could win. I don't think it will improve things much, other than getting rid of the obnoxious crew around Bush. I'm sad for Americans---and the World.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 08:39 AM

I recommend heartily that anyone who wonders if he has the character for the job view the film, Going Up River.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 09:05 AM

...and until you have, refrain from judging the man. It makes it absolutely clear who this is that you are -- or should be -- voting for.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Old Guy
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 10:40 AM

Crawford Iconoclast's recommendation!

Amos: The name of the paper is the The Lone Star Iconoclast.

This is a perfect example of the way you twist things and add to them to present a distorted view in the hope that people will be persuaded vote for your arrogant asshole candidate.

It is published in Clifton Texas in another county, not Crawford county, by W. Leon Smith, a Democrat who was defeated twice in campaigns for the Texas House of Representatives and mayor of that town. He founded the paper in 2000 after the election so he could claim it is the hometown paper of Bush. There is a PO box in Crawford and nothing else.

"About The Clifton Record

The Clifton Record, founded in 1895, has been published since 1979 by Progressive Media Communications, Inc., a corporation owned by James W. Smith and W. Leon Smith. The Record is Clifton's oldest continuing business and the oldest operating newspaper in Bosque County. It is published twice weekly and serves Bosque County and surrounding areas.
For inquiries, call [phone] or write to:
The Clifton Record
P.O. Box 353
Clifton, TX 76634"
http://www.cliftonrecord.com/about.asp

"About The Lone Star Iconoclast

The Lone Star Iconoclast began publication in December 2000 and has published weekly ever since. The newspaper is owned by Smith Media, Inc. and has both a print edition and an online edition. The online edition mirrors much of the content that appears in the main print edition.

The editorial staff consists of
W. Leon Smith, editor-in-chief
Don M. Fisher, associate editor
Nathan Diebenow, associate editor"

"The Iconoclast is published weekly, on Wednesdays.
Subscription price:
McLennan and Bosque Counties (Texas), one year: $40.
Elsewhere, one year: $45.
(Please give old address when requesting change of address.)

CONTACT INFORMATION:
e-mail: [e-mail]
telephone: (all departments): [phone]"
http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/about.htm

Crawford Rallies Behind Bush; Boycotts Local Paper

"Texas town turns on paper over Kerry endorsement
The Associated Press Posted October 13 2004

CRAWFORD, TEXAS -- Signs at the bank, the cafe and the Bottlinger Grain bins all declare Crawford -- the proud home of the president's ranch -- as "Bush Country."

So when the Lone Star Iconoclast, a tiny weekly that bills itself as Bush's hometown paper, endorsed Democrat John Kerry, there was an outcry.

Local businesses pulled their ads and banned the paper from their stores.

Most folks in Crawford, population 705, wholeheartedly support the re-election of the man whose "Western White House" made their town famous.

The paper's publisher, W. Leon Smith, said he never expected such a hostile response. He knew "a person or two might pull an ad, that we might lose a subscriber or two."

"But this has turned a little more vicious," said Smith, 51.

More than a dozen area businesses banded together to take out a two-page ad in a competing newspaper to endorse Bush, and all the stores in Crawford that sold The Iconoclast stopped."

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/orl-aseccrawford13101304oct13,0,5706416.story?coll=sfla-newsnation-front

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 10:44 AM

Guilty as charged, OG.

But let me add that you are deeply and sadly wrong about Mister Kerry. He is not arrogant and he is not an asshole. I have figured on this for some time, but having reviewed "Going Up River" and what he went through in the war, as well as organizing the veterans against the war after he came home, I am convinced you have badly mis-assessed his character and badly mis-estimated his motives. The man is a gentleman in the best sense of the word.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Old Guy
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 12:04 PM

Amos:

Point conceded but as I said before, I was not against Kerry at the beginning of this campaign but as time went on and he started being so negative on Bush that it turned me against Kerry, not toward Bush but away from Kerry. It has even cause Bush to act up and attack Kerry and make an ass out of himself.

Maybe Kerry is a victim of the political jihadists that are hell bent to get him elected and keep feeding him this stuff that make him seem like an arrogant asshole. Maybe he is better than he is sounding but he is polarizing people and making them more extreme in their positions, not necessarily winning them over.

Look at you and me Neither of us have or will change our positions, we just get more bitter.

At the heart of this matter is the two party political system and the money that fuels it.

We need to elect someone that has the guts to start a trend to eliminate it. Then we can vote for whom we like and people in Congress can vote for bill strictly on their merit, without pressure from the party or lobbyists.

I don't know how we have lasted this long. It looks like this election will create a new definition of politics, a new level of hostilities and money wasting.

The only two possibly non partisan people I see on the horizon are Lieberman and McCain.

If Bush wins I say get one or the other to cross over to the other party and run them in 08. They won't stand a chance against the two party machine if they try to go independent. Maybe McCain would go democratic if he could run as Pres and Leiberman as VP.

If Kerry wins they would have to run Republican.

Something has to be done or there will be anarchy and a revolution of some sort.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 12:05 PM

Old Guy:

That is the clearest and most thoughtful post I've seen from your pen!! Thanks.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Old Guy
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 12:13 PM

Amos: It sums up what I have been posting all along in different threads.

Start a new thread. "The two party system is killing us"



Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 10:35 AM

The staff of Slate Magazine posted their voting decisions and reasoning in an interesting discussion on this page. It was Kerry by a very strong majority. That is, in itself, predictable.

The reasons for the votes and the arguments by Bush voters are what's interesting. They all seem articulate and intelligent and above all willingt to dialogue. This stand sin sharp contrast to some of the less seemly diatribes we have posted here, to which, I am ashamed to say, I have even contributed!!

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: GUEST,Johnjohn
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 10:16 PM

There was an Amos post here about a newspaper called the Crawford Iconoclast. Where did it go?

JJ

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 10:20 PM

No, Old Guy, the one party system is killin' us....

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 01:24 PM

The Berkshire Eagle offers this endoresement of Senator EKrry, stating among other things:

President Kerry would also appeal to Americans' better nature, restoring some of the optimism that has vanished during the Bush years. Not wishing to call attention to its abysmal record of failure at home and abroad, the Bush administration's campaign strategy has been to prey on America's fears of the world and of change. America has long been a source of hope to the world, and if it is once again, it will find that it has allies in the hard fight against the forces of terror. A Kerry administration would give us a proud America untainted by the arrogance of the Bush White House.

There is no underestimating the importance of this election, given what President Bush has put America through for four years and the perils that lie ahead in a second Bush administration. John Kerry will restore America to the right track, domestically and internationally, and The Eagle endorses him for president of the United States.


A

Subject: Kerry Sounds Like a Mudcatter
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 02:29 PM

This quote from an interview with one of John Kerry's oldest acquaintances, Dan Barbiero:

He worked hard at music. For him to play bass in the Electras, to me, was surprising, because I didn't think he had -- he always surprises you because he puts so much effort into things. He played the bass in the Electras. He was listening to rock and roll, but he also had a very eclectic taste in music. He loved European music. I can skip ahead a year into a couple years into college. He was in love with the Broadway show Camelot. He loved that kind of Broadway show music, loved it.

"He was socially conscious. People tell me that one of the criticisms of John is that he's a waffler or he changes his mind. As long as I've known him -- and I've known him a long, long time -- his points of view on social issues, on environmental issues, on our relationship to the rest of the world, Europe and so on -- he's been unchanged.

The attitudes and things that he says today, he has always been saying. How to get there and what you have to do to achieve those goals may change from week to week or month to month. But his visions and his beliefs have been very, very consistent as long as I've known him. I've known him since he's 17 years old. ..."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 02:36 PM

What's the difference between Kerry and Bush, if there is one? They both come from these families that are entranced with the idea of public service. They both come from old Yale families. They've both been interested in politics, I think, from an early age. How are they different from each other?

Richard Kerry and Rosemary weren't interested in making money. The Bushes were. The Bush family moved to Florida and Texas to get into the oil business, which was where the riches were. They've suddenly made the connection of the Eastern establishment to the Houston petroleum club.

Richard Kerry and Rosemary are not doing that. Richard Kerry is comfortable with his civil servant pay, writing one memoir in the Star Spangled Mirror about his time in the diplomatic corps. John's mother Rosemary's biggest concern in life was the Audubon Society and how to keep the natural beauty of Cape Cod pristine. They are not looking to find new ways to make money in a booming American post-war economy the way the Bush family was.'


George W. though, and John Kerry -- how are they different from each other?

I think they're completely different people in these ways. George W. Bush was not interested in Kierkegaard and Heidegger and reading all these books. He was not interested in the European tradition of education that you would show off by how you could recite your Rudyard Kipling the way Kerry would, or that you knew Yates, or that you spoke foreign languages.

When you talk to people that were with them both at Yale, Bush's feeling of inferiority in intellectual conversation turned him to Texas, where being an intellectual was frowned upon. You just had to wear cowboy boots and talk straight, talk hard, buy into the myths or reality of the Alamo and Sam Houston and San Jacinto and some of these kind of American stories. You didn't have to go learn your Portuguese. You didn't have to show off that you out-debate somebody for two hours.

So Kerry is much more of a trans-Atlantic person. He believes in this Atlantic alliance. Kerry thought that was a sign of success, that you could stay up all night and debate David Hume with somebody. George W. Bush learned that "Well, all I need to do is get along with the guys." There's a great populist streak in George W. Bush, in the American grain of it, that you get along with the working-class people. In that way, Midland, Texas, is the intellectual home of George W. Bush.

---

Excerpted from an interview at www.pbs.org.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Sam L
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 02:58 PM

it's asking too much of me to imagine how Kerry would lead--that's partly why there's a fovor toward incumbents.

On another thread I arrogantly announced that history will not be kind to Bush. I don't really know, I can't predict.

But imagine a future, when Bush's intentions are not so much the question, when his determination isn't the thing, because he's not up for election.

The fact will remain that American soldiers eager to strike back at terrorists were sent to the wrong country and got mired in it, and that we spent a lot of damage to our relationships with our allies to do this. And ran up a huge deficit? Grant me that tax cuts won't look as great to people who are not getting them.
When in the future is all this going to look good? Even without appearances of, at best, mixed motives? Forget the steady curious alignments of Bush policy to other interests than the people's welfare--it's still not good at all, without that. What's it going to look like when Republicans can choose a candidate with proven military expertise, a General, to remember George W. Bush's confident appraisal of himself as a war president? On what basis? Good intentions? That won't count much.

I think if Americans look at the overall situation, they will want to give a decently qualified man a chance, even if he's not ideal. Bush's unpopular stances are unpopular for good reason, and if you imagine looking back on them, with other viable candidates in view, I think you can only really find them shockingly terrible, from any political point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: GUEST,Banshee
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 07:46 AM

(2004-03-29) -- Without mentioning Democrat presidential hopeful John Forbes Kerry by name, President George Bush today responded to Mr. Kerry's use of the Bible to attack his "compassionate conservatism."

Speaking in a church service Sunday, Mr. Kerry criticized "our present national leadership" by quoting a passage from the New Testament book of James: "The Scriptures say, what does it profit, my brother, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?" Kerry said. "When we look at what is happening in America today, where are the works of compassion?"

When asked what the president thought of Mr. Kerry's comment, chief White House spokesman Scott McClellan released the following written statement:

"But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways."
-- James 1:5-8

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of John Kerry
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 02:10 PM

The New Yorker endorsed Kerry in this unprecedented editorial:

Excerpt:

When the Administration's geopolitical, national-interest, and anti-
terrorism justifications for the Iraq war collapsed, it groped for an
argument from altruism: postwar chaos, violence, unemployment, and
brownouts notwithstanding, the war has purchased freedoms for the
people of Iraq which they could not have had without Saddam's fall.
That is true. But a sad and ironic consequence of this war is that its
fumbling prosecution has undermined its only even arguably meritorious
rationale-and, as a further consequence, the salience of idealism in
American foreign policy has been likewise undermined. Foreign-policy
idealism has taken many forms-Wilson's aborted world federalism,
Carter's human-rights jawboning, and Reagan's flirtation with total
nuclear disarmament, among others. The failed armed intervention in
Somalia and the successful ones in the Balkans are other examples. The
neoconservative version ascendant in the Bush Administration, post-
9/11, draws partly on these strains. There is surely idealistic
purpose in envisioning a Middle East finally relieved of its
autocracies and dictatorships. Yet this Administration's adventure in
Iraq is so gravely flawed and its credibility so badly damaged that in
the future, faced with yet another moral dilemma abroad, it can be
expected to retreat, a victim of its own Iraq Syndrome.


The damage visited upon America, and upon America's standing in the
world, by the Bush Administration's reckless mishandling of the public
trust will not easily be undone. And for many voters the desire to see
the damage arrested is reason enough to vote for John Kerry. But the
challenger has more to offer than the fact that he is not George W.
Bush. In every crucial area of concern to Americans (the economy,
health care, the environment, Social Security, the judiciary, national
security, foreign policy, the war in Iraq, the fight against
terrorism), Kerry offers a clear, corrective alternative to Bush's
curious blend of smugness, radicalism, and demagoguery. Pollsters like
to ask voters which candidate they'd most like to have a beer with,
and on that metric Bush always wins. We prefer to ask which candidate
is better suited to the governance of our nation.

Throughout his long career in public service, John Kerry has
demonstrated steadiness and sturdiness of character. The physical
courage he showed in combat in Vietnam was matched by moral courage
when he raised his voice against the war, a choice that has carried
political costs from his first run for Congress, lost in 1972 to a
campaign of character assassination from a local newspaper that could
not forgive his antiwar stand, right through this year's Swift Boat
ads. As a senator, Kerry helped expose the mischief of the Bank of
Commerce and Credit International, a money-laundering operation that
favored terrorists and criminal cartels; when his investigation forced
him to confront corruption among fellow-Democrats, he rejected the
cronyism of colleagues and brought down power brokers of his own party
with the same dedication that he showed in going after Oliver North in
the Iran-Contra scandal. His leadership, with John McCain, of the
bipartisan effort to put to rest the toxic debate over Vietnam-era
P.O.W.s and M.I.A.s and to lay the diplomatic groundwork for
Washington's normalization of relations with Hanoi, in the mid-
nineties, was the signal accomplishment of his twenty years on Capitol
Hill, and it is emblematic of his fairness of mind and independence of
spirit. Kerry has made mistakes (most notably, in hindsight at least,
his initial opposition to the Gulf War in 1990), but-in contrast to
the President, who touts his imperviousness to changing realities as a
virtue-he has learned from them.

Kerry's performance on the stump has been uneven, and his public
groping for a firm explanation of his position on Iraq was
discouraging to behold. He can be cautious to a fault, overeager to
acknowledge every angle of an issue; and his reluctance to expose the
Administration's appalling record bluntly and relentlessly until very
late in the race was a missed opportunity. But when his foes sought to
destroy him rather than to debate him they found no scandals and no
evidence of bad faith in his past. In the face of infuriating and
scurrilous calumnies, he kept the sort of cool that the thin-skinned
and painfully insecure incumbent cannot even feign during the
unprogrammed give-and-take of an electoral debate. Kerry's mettle has
been tested under fire-the fire of real bullets and the political fire
that will surely not abate but, rather, intensify if he is elected-and
he has shown himself to be tough, resilient, and possessed of a
properly Presidential dose of dignified authority. While Bush has
pandered relentlessly to the narrowest urges of his base, Kerry has
sought to appeal broadly to the American center. In a time of
primitive partisanship, he has exhibited a fundamentally undogmatic
temperament. In campaigning for America's mainstream restoration,
Kerry has insisted that this election ought to be decided on the
urgent issues of our moment, the issues that will define American life
for the coming half century. That insistence is a measure of his
character. He is plainly the better choice. As observers, reporters,
and commentators we will hold him to the highest standards of honesty
and performance. For now, as citizens, we hope for his victory.

- The Editors