Reply #8: Does Kos ID Blue387 frequent here?

[beachmom]

I was patient and waded through the filth, the sarcasm, the misinformation, the rehashing of rehashments, and I found an AWESOME comment at the end of the Kos thread. Just wondering if the poster there, posts here. Because it was beautiful (it starts slowly, and then starts gushing)!!!

I am posting it in full (so you don't have to give that awful site another hit, or vote):

Can we please stop bashing John Kerry? (none / 0)

Pretty please? With Splenda on top?

While we're at it, can we please stop attacking Mary Beth Cahill and Bob Shrum? They are loyal Democrats who did the best they could.

I'm reading the comments and I ask everyone: what would you want Kerry to have done? March over to the SBVT HQ and strangle John O'Neill?

I love Kerry and I admit, he has problems. Yes, he ran a bad campaign. Yes, he lost to Bush and lost votes among women and Latinos. Yes, he was torpedoed by the SBVT. But, facing a wartime president with an advantage in fundraising, grassroots/organization and a loyal base, John Kerry would have problems. I like Dean, Clark and Edwards but I don't believe any other Democrat would have done better than Kerry in 2004: Howard Dean's candor would have hurt him like John McCain while John Edwards had charm and charisma mixed with economic populism but I don't think he could have stood up to Republican scrutiny. Wesley Clark was politically inexperienced when the nation wanted - craved, desired, etc. - strong leadership in uncertain times. People found that strong leadership in George W. Bush's words "You may not agree with what I stand for, but you know whay I believe" - the strong, nuturing father figure who would protect the country, etc.

And if you think you can run a better campaign than John Kerry, do what I plan to do: run for office. I plan to run for Congress in New York; my only excuse for not running tomorrow is my age since I'm only 20.

I agree with this diary: a new, improved John Kerry can win in 2008 if only we at Daily Kos would let him. I recommend hiring top-rate talent who recognize how the Republicans are building up a grassroots to win in the long term. Maybe we can hire Michael Whouley and David Axelrod for his campaign, and torpedo the SBVT once and for all.

I agree with Barack Obama - we've got to be a united force and I cannot tolerate people chewing on other Democrats and not chewing on the people that really deserve to be chewed: Karl Rove, the RNC and their strategy of aggressive grassroots/organization. For example, the Washington Times reported the RNC has/had over 6million email addresses in its database.

Brad Carson wrote last year in New Republic arguing that we Democrats lost because people do not like the general direction of popular culture and will vote for anyone - and I mean anyone - who will attempt/promise to change it. That is why Joe Lieberman is popular and that is why Brad Carson lost to (ugh!) Tom Coburn. Insert Thomas Frank and Kansas here.

Earlier this year, I wrote a defense of Kerry:

I support John Kerry in 2008. He speaks to my beliefs and, with a few changes, should run. I liked his proposal for health care, I would love a multilateral foreign policy, I would like a president who can pronounce "nuclear" and a president who doesn't think in black and white. I believe he is a man of purpose and conviction, to fight for what he believed was right for America and not for himself. He joined when he didn't have to, he served in Vietnam when he didn't have to, he protested the war as part of the VVAW because he was always against the war. He didn't have to run for Congress or lieutenant governor or the Senate. He did it because he wanted the best for America and not something for political convenience or for the base. And I hate it when people say he is dull or stiff or uncharismatic when, in person, he is charismatic and charming. Look at how he won Iowa and New Hampshire voters with retail politics as chronicled by Walter Shapiro who followed him around for a year. Look at how Bill Weld considered Kerry strong and charming.

Kerry is a fighter. In October 2003, his campaign was dead in the water with Howard Dean about to waltz to the nomination and the convention in Boston. But Kerry changed, fixed things, dumped some things and came back stronger. By October 2004, Kerry was tied with Bush. I think had he run a better campaign and been stronger, he would have won. And we would be looking at Vice President Edwards and SecDef Wesley Clark.

Plus, I like him since I have some things in common: a lonely childhood with an mother whose feet never touched the ground, a distant father son who grew up as a loner with few friends who entered politics with a keen interest in foreign policy...as a 22 year old kid, had the wisdom of old age and knew what we were getting into in Vietnam. words still echo today as an eerily prescient reminder of this president and Iraq.

He was inspired by John F. Kennedy to place your country over yourself in his call to duty and public service, to aspire and achieve something greater than the next tax cut or war. As a New Yorker, I even forgive Kerry for supporting the Red Sox....Why can't I support someone who shares my ideas, beliefs and values? If we could turn John Kerry into Jed Bartlet...

I wish the other Democrats running or planning to run in 2008 the best. But I believe John Kerry has the strength, honor and integrity to be president. And that's why I intend to vote for John Kerry in 2008. Period.

I also like Russ Feingold.


"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass

by Blue387 on Tue Oct 11, 2005 at 11:58:59 AM PDT
< Reply to This | none1: Unproductive2: Marginal3: Good4: Excellent >