Did you think Kerry treated Dennis badly?

[Vas Liz]

Frankly Kerry seemed unnecessarily rude and dismissing of Dennis. Both in his tone and statements.

Two things that hit me most of all

1. Totally ignoring Dennis torwards the end when Dennis asked him what the right way would be. (it was obvious the audience caught this in a neg light as well)

and

2. Regarding the 40,000 troops.

Kerry KNEW what Dennis was talking about. A Yahoo search even links to Kerry's own web site regarding that 40,000 troops statement.

Instead of initially saying "Oh well what I meant regarding the statement you are referring to was..." he said essentially "Oh what are you talking about? I don't know what you're talking about".

This made Dennis look like an idiot and liar. (which I am sure was the intended effect) You could see the surprise that Kerry was denying knowledge of such a claim simply by Dennis's facial expression.

I feel Kerry should issue a public apology to Dennis after tonight.

[waldenx]

1. its Kerry's repulsive personality

everyone in the country will be sick of this jackass 1 month after he is President.

[liberalnurse]

30. I am already sick of it......

:puke:

[bigtree]

76. I'm sick of these factless assaults on Kerry's character.

Kerry was respectful to Rep. Kucinich. I look forward to a clean shot from Kucinich on the IWR to Kerry. I think Kerry's answer will satisfy most viewers and voters. That is the challenge in this race and in governing. You have to overcome all kinds of obstacles to get your message across. It's getting late early (Yogi)) in this primary. Kucinich has to score. Kerry won't do it for him.

[rhite5]

78. It certainly was NOT a "factless assault"

Everybody knows the Kerry advocates adding 40,000 more bodies to the forces in Iraq. It is on his web page! He acted like he did not say that. He needs to explain. He didn't. It is that simple.

[bigtree]

81. Falsehood, Misrepresentation, Distortion, Obfuscation of Kerry's statement

Here it is. You are not entitled to replace Kerry's words with yours.


By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 9/1/2003
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/01/kerry_says_army_should_grow_by_40000

Senator John F. Kerry said yesterday that he favors expanding the Army by roughly 40,000 soldiers to relieve troop strain, and would spend whatever it takes to stop the guerrilla warfare in Iraq. But Kerry said he would not send more US soldiers into the country, preferring international troops that include a corps from Muslim nations.

A division is roughly 18,000 people. Under Kerry's plan, one would be dedicated to combat, the other to civil functions such as policing. He estimated that the additional troops would cost at least $5 billion, which he said he would pay for by reallocating money within the Defense Department budget.

"Personnel is the most important thing we should do," he said, explaining that the existing 480,000-strong Army is strained by multiple deployments.

While calling for an overall expansion of the nation's 1.4 million armed forces, Kerry was careful to say that he would not send more soldiers to Iraq, where the current force of nearly 150,000 troops is subject to frequent attacks. He called for a multinational expansion, saying, "the best way to protect the troops is to get Arab-speaking Muslim troops on the ground in Iraq."

[youngred]

87. WHAT ABOUT KERRY'S FOUR (COUNT EM) INTERRUPTIONS

double standard's are fun! :thumbsdown:

[bigtree]

94. Dennis needs to be more assertive.

That will serve him in the presidency.

[youngred]

95. So which is it?

He's Rude and disruptive for interrupting Kerry.

or

He's Too meek and quiet and written off and interrrupted.

Damned if you do, Damned if you don't

[MAlibdem]

99. I'm just analyzing what I saw

I don't think Kucinich has a chance, I don't care so much how he performs. I'm just saying what I saw, and what other people in the room with me saw.

[youngred]

100. And yet

it still differs from what a lot of other people saw...and you still have nothing to back anything...just your opinion, when i gave facts.

[bigtree]

104. I would never call Dennis Kucinich rude.

He does have a hard way to go though. I won't characterize why. I'll let his supporters do that.

I would like to hear more from him in these debates. I don't think that I want to hear him degrade my candidate however.

[youngred]

106. when and HOW did he degrade your candidate

specifically

[MAlibdem]

2. NO

Kucinich was interrupting rudely on the first.

The second makes sense to me, we need a military police division

[corporatewhore]

6. no it was rude to even suggest going into iraq was rightTHERE ARE NO WMDS

and kerry knew

[MrPeepers]

11. But...

that is hardly rude, to suggest that the removal of a ruthless dictator is the right thing to do. Kerry was saying that the way we went about it was completely wrong, but the act itself was righteous. Nothing rude there.

Peepers

[WitchWay]

43. War - Righteous?

Why's won't Kerry be honest about being PRO-WAR?
What means will he use to get the 40,000 troops in his first 100 days in office?
Why is he so obsessed with his "war hero" image?

Oh, yeah, Nothing rude in using young Americans as fodder to get access to oil, maiming and killing them and bombing Iraqis and ripping children to shreds while occupying a nation in order to install just another puppet regime for the Oil-garchies? Or haven't you been paying attention?

[bigtree]

70. What means will he use to get the 40,000 troops in his first 100 days

By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 9/1/2003
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/01/kerry_says_army_should_grow_by_40000/

Senator John F. Kerry said yesterday that he favors expanding the Army by roughly 40,000 soldiers to relieve troop strain, and would spend whatever it takes to stop the guerrilla warfare in Iraq. But Kerry said he would not send more US soldiers into the country, preferring international troops that include a corps from Muslim nations.

A division is roughly 18,000 people. Under Kerry's plan, one would be dedicated to combat, the other to civil functions such as policing. He estimated that the additional troops would cost at least $5 billion, which he said he would pay for by reallocating money within the Defense Department budget.

"Personnel is the most important thing we should do," he said, explaining that the existing 480,000-strong Army is strained by multiple deployments.

While calling for an overall expansion of the nation's 1.4 million armed forces, Kerry was careful to say that he would not send more soldiers to Iraq, where the current force of nearly 150,000 troops is subject to frequent attacks. He called for a multinational expansion, saying, "the best way to protect the troops is to get Arab-speaking Muslim troops on the ground in Iraq."

I honor and respect John Kerry's service in the Vietnam war and his commitments that he made to public service after his discharge. These will serve as a good foil to the certain attacks on his patriotism from the arrogant demagogues in Bush's cabal. I intend to continue to strongly promote these attributes and hopefully avert the smears that are sure to come.

Pro-war is a false characterization of John Kerry, based I believe on his vote for the IWR which he intended as a means to forestall or avert war by directing Bush back to the U.N. Nothing in John Kerry's statements before or after the IWR vote and invasion would support the contention that he is pro-war. It serves no sensible purpose to assert that he is pro-war outside of this primary. Bush can't find refuge in the IWR for his unilateral, preemptive invasion. Bush will be challenged to justify what evidence he used to determine that there was a "continuing threat from Iraq", as well as his disregard for the restraint implied in the resolution.

[bigtree]

75. This is hateful speech directed at Kerry that is not supported by facts

Like it or not, I think these assaults on Kerry's character are disgusting and I don't see why anyone has to shy away from defending him for fear of being labeled with the same pro-war, Bush-lite shit that is thrown around here. Most of these posters of this sick attack on Kerry character have read his statements before and after the IWR vote and Bush's invasion and ignore them in their zeal to tear him down.

And then come the arrogant, snide assaults on the intelligence and character of those who would defend him. I can read as well as anyone. I won't take a back seat as to my understanding of the issues surrounding Iraq, especially to those who assert that the IWR directed Bush to invade and occupy Iraq, or that a 'no' vote was guaranteed to restrain him, or that it was a certainty that there was no threat because there were no WMDs and 'everyone knew that', or that the IWR was a 'blank check'.

My view of the IWR:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic...

Fortunately, the 'Blame the Democrats First' strategy will not get a platform much longer here as the primary draws to a close, and the other candidates will soon be forced to either stifle their shitpicking or be satisfied with enabling Bush.

Are you paying attention?

[revcarol]

77. Yes, they are assaults on his character, and we have a right to make

ASSAULTS ON HIS CHARACTER.

And you think we should just sit down and go to the back of the bus.

Well, NO MORE. His character is definitely in question when he, by his words and actions, dismisses one of OUR candidates.

His character is definitely in question when he ignores DK's question because he doesn't want to tell the truth about the 40,000 troops he wants to put into Iraq: WE DON'T HAVE THEM AND THE ONLY WAY TO GET THEM IS BY THE DRAFT!!

His character is in question when he makes out like he doesn't know what DK is talking about and by implication, paints him as a liar.

You're right!! HIS CHARACTER IS IN QUESTION.

Telling the truth is not "hateful speech." IT'S CALLED TRUTH.

[bigtree]

80. No. I think you can make whatever slanderous assaults you want

on Kerry's character.

I don't have to like it or shy away from defending him. Truth is in the eye of the beholder. Just questioning Kerry's character doesn't put his character in question. Don't be so smug in your criticisms and assume that similar questions of character could not be thrown around your candidate. I won't do it. I think it stinks of arrogance and desperation. I won't stoop to it.

"By implication paints Kucinich a liar?" Kucinich brought up the 40,000 troops with the false Internet spin. I don't know where he got his info but he was completely incorrect in his assertion. He then tried to shift the argument to exit strategy, to which Kerry asserted that he had his own, whereupon the conversation did not allow Kerry a full explanation or refutation of Kucinich's charges. He should have had his facts in line. He made a false assertion about Kerry's statements on the 40,000 troops by implying that Kerry intended to increase the Iraqi forces. That is not what Kerry had said about the 40,000 troops. Here is his statement:

By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 9/1/2003
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/01/kerry_says_army_... /

Senator John F. Kerry said yesterday that he favors expanding the Army by roughly 40,000 soldiers to relieve troop strain, and would spend whatever it takes to stop the guerrilla warfare in Iraq. But Kerry said he would not send more US soldiers into the country, preferring international troops that include a corps from Muslim nations.

A division is roughly 18,000 people. Under Kerry's plan, one would be dedicated to combat, the other to civil functions such as policing. He estimated that the additional troops would cost at least $5 billion, which he said he would pay for by reallocating money within the Defense Department budget.

"Personnel is the most important thing we should do," he said, explaining that the existing 480,000-strong Army is strained by multiple deployments.

While calling for an overall expansion of the nation's 1.4 million armed forces, Kerry was careful to say that he would not send more soldiers to Iraq, where the current force of nearly 150,000 troops is subject to frequent attacks. He called for a multinational expansion, saying, "the best way to protect the troops is to get Arab-speaking Muslim troops on the ground in Iraq."

Dennis was wrong in that assertion, but you would still press on with the false premise. Good luck with that.

___________________________________________________________________

The Union Leader and ABC News Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate - Part 1
Location: Manchester, NH
Date: 01/22/2004
January 22, 2004 Thursday
http://www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.php?speech_id=M000027534&keyword=&phrase=the+draft&contain=

MR. GRIFFITH: Senator Kerry, in a speech at Drake University, you said in your first 100 days you would move to increase our armed forces by as much as 40,000 troops. You said there was a dire need for two full divisions. I'm the parent of two teenage sons. I-we're patriots, and people are wondering right now about voluntary versus draft. And, as president, how do you hope to lure and attract quality people into the military? And, as a follow-up, where do you stand on the issue of the draft?

SEN. KERRY: We don't need a draft now, and I wouldn't be in favor of it under the current circumstances. But, look, the first place you start to attract people into the military is to have a president who can prove to America that that president will be responsible about how that president deploys the military. All across this country there are families right now-all of us have talked to them-who are suffering greatly, because the Guards and Reserves have been called up. They're overextended. The troops of the United States of America are overextended. Their deployments are too long. The families are hurting at home because they lose money from the private sector when they're called up, and they get paid less in the military, and nobody makes it up to them. The fact is if we are going to maintain this level of commitment on a global basis-for the moment we have to, because of what's happened-we need an additional two divisions. One is a combat division, and one is a support division. And that's the responsible thing to do. I've also said, responsibly, that's temporary, because I intend to be a president who goes back to the United Nations, rejoins the community of nations, brings other boots on the ground to help us in the world, and reduces the overall need for deployment of American forces in the globe-and I mean North Korea, Germany and the rest of the world where we can begin to set up a new architecture of participation of other countries.

[MAlibdem]

82. DK dismisses himself

When he interrupts himself to make sure Larry King is listening

Or when he LITERALLY raises his hand to speak

Or when he RUDELY interrupts other candidates as they are explaining their positions to the public.

[youngred]

88. Let's see

King was talking to the other moderators while DK was talking, something he did to NO other candidate....pure rudeness

Raises his hand to speak...no one was listening when he did try to get a word in edgewise, and he was doing what they were all supposed to be doing-signaling for attention rather than rudely jumped in.

KERRY INTERRUPTED DENNIS FOUR FOUR TIMES, to Dennis' Once! Dennis tried to answer when he was interrupted but no one listened to him. When Dennis interrrupted Kerry looked at him like a bug then continued.

You are blinded

[bigtree]

93. I am for Kerry. He did whatI would expect of any candidate.

He got his message out above the others.

What did Dennis accuse Kerry of? 40,000 new troops for Iraq. That was a mistaken accusation based on a misunderstanding of what Kerry said in the statement which was strongly qualified against more U.S. troops in Iraq. (see above) Kerry tried to answer. As for the cut-offs, those are Dennis' responsibility. As president he will have to get his message out over many disparate forums with more interference than an interrupting Kerry.

I do look forward to Dennis getting a clear shot Sunday at the question of how Kerry would get our troops out and how Kerry would have done differently than Bush, which by the way, Kerry has extensively outlined many other occasions.

[youngred]

96. No, Kerry said something about the right way to handle Iraq

Kucinich asked what the Right way was.

I'm very familiar with Kerry's plan, and he was half right and half wrong.

[bigtree]

98. Kerry didn't get a chance to answer

That doesn't mean his answer would have been determinate of anything. I think the candidates would be better served in these forums by using the time to outline their own policy and vision. When you attack in these forums you give ground for the opponent to respond. Perhaps Dennis thought that Kerry's answer would be definitive, but Kerry's views on Iraq are neither extreme or widely unknown. I would be more informed if Dennis laid his program out fully. I am certain that then his position would achieve at least equal ground with the others. Kerry's and Edward's were laid out pretty extensively whether or not you agree with them. Dennis needs to assert his view more forcefully. I think he makes a compelling case, although I also find Kerry's position consistent, rational, and defensible.

[youngred]

101. He has laid his position out fully

but no one is listening and when he tries he gets interrupted.

Catch 22.

[bigtree]

105. What I heard of Dennis' vision in the debate was excellent.

He was mistaken about the 40,000 troops however. He should ignore Kerry. He needs to use these forums to aggressively define himself for the viewers and the voters.

[MAlibdem]

102. exactly

When you attack in these forums you give ground for the opponent to respond

I recall DK asking Kerry a question on something, Kerry taking the question, and speaking for the next minute on it, effectively robbing Kucinich of his turn, that was politically and oratorically masterful. If you cant stand the heat...

[youngred]

103. Wrong

flat out, and its more than one question, its EVERY question.

DK was allowed One full answer all evening.

[truizm]

3. Yes, he did.

[maddezmom]

4. please, the moderators treated DK badly

:(

[littlejoe]

67. I will agree with that statement. King's dismissive nature toward

Kucinich was unforgivable. Kucinich, no matter what I think, or what anyone else thinks is a candidate and should be treated with respect. He got little.

[WillyBrandt]

5. No. Kucinich butted in, and Kerry was right to ignore him.

[youngred]

24. Like the 4 Times Kerry butted in?

to Dennis' one?

The only difference is the cameras ran right to Kerry when he interrupted

[truizm]

34. Exactly. Kerry disgusts me.

[MrPeepers]

7. Kerry did the right thing.

They'd already been over Iraq, they weren't discussing it, it's been beaten to death in every debate, and Kucinich shouldn't have tried to butt in like that.

Peepers

[truizm]

10. Beaten to death?

It hasn't been discussed in depth at all.

[MrPeepers]

17. Well,

if we wait for issues to really be discussed in depth in a debate we'll be waiting for a while. There's no time for true in-depth discussion, but it's come as close to it as any issue.

Peepers

[youngred]

26. the troops who died this weak don't think its been beaten to death

because some people voted for the IWR....now who could that be?

[littlejoe]

68. What was it about Kerry's and Edwards statements about IWR

that you didn't understand?

[youngred]

89. I understood perfectly thank you

but the person I was replying to said the war was not a big issue and was bored by it being brought up again.

[WitchWay]

44. Kerry did the right thing...

Kerry did the right thing by supporting bush's "wrong" war?

Does this add up to you?

[KissMyAsscroft]

8. Kerry had already answered his Iraq question...

His blow off meant "I already answered your damn question" and it was effective.

If it was the other way around, Kucinich fans would have loved it.

And this is coming from a Dean supporter who doesn't really like Kerry all that much..

[truizm]

14. It'd be nice if we could actually have a debate

rather than just a series of questions where candidates spew their same old rhetoric.

[mitchtv]

9. Dennis was rude to interject like he did

just when John began to speak -he deserved it. The other thing, I must have missed, or it was just too subtle. No apology needed

[Vas Liz]

22. Well

Kerry threw the first punch early on (and continued to do so by his tone and manner torwards Dennis). If it was rude for Dennis to interject one time torwards the end of the debate after Kerry had given him attitude the entire time... Well, can we say unfair double standard?

[jpgray]

12. Since Kerry dodged, mods should have called him on it

I don't blame him from dodging Kucinich--he won't win that debate. But the moderators should have laid DK's question on him.

[MoonRiver]

13. They're in competition for the nomination. Of course there will be some

arguing and posturing. I think Kerry and Edwards had quite a bit of that as well.

[Frances]

15. I didn't think Kerry was rude to anyone

Kerry is a cautious man--when asked about a running mate, Edwards said that an Edwards-Kerry ticket sounded good to him. Kerry said he didn't have a list and that he was just trying to get the nomination. I accept that, although I do like Edwards.

Sharpton made a good point--he will stay in the race because he wants a voice through his delegates at the convention.

Kucinich is getting a chance to get his views across as well. I personally like a publicly financed (expanded medicare) privately delivered health care system. But it needs a new name because Larry King just dismissed it as socialism, and it's not.

[TheDonkey]

16. I would have bitch slapped Kucinich

if he would yell such a snide remark during my answer.
I'd give him the respect to finish his answers I'd expect the same in return. He knows very well what Kerry's "right" way was even if he doesn't agree.

[BeyondGeography]

18. The only apology is owed to Edwards

by Janet Clayton, who all but labelled him a pretty boy.

DK got tossed around by Larry King a little bit, but, hey, he did get to go to Maui this week, so I can't feel too sorry for him.

[NNN0LHI]

19. Dennis whooped Kerry like a red headed stepson. Damn right!

Kerry will get over it though. He is the forgiving type.

Don

[Paulie]

Was Dennis a participant, or stage dressing?

Because of how they treated Dennis, how else could he get a word in? :wtf:

[maddezmom]

20. starting to think that folks are manufacturing problems

that aren't there.... :shrug:

[diamondsoul]

37. You probably didn't

notice the side-shots of Kerry whenever Kucinich was asked a question and started to speak. Please note, I started out as perfectly content to have Kerry as a candidate and frequently defending him.

After what I saw tonight there will be no more of that. He rolled his eyes, turned to the audience and was essentially completely dismissive and outright sneering at Kucinich's policies. It was sickening.

I will grant you that Kucinich supporters have become so used to watching for mistreatment in order to do our media responses that we may be paying more attention to who mistreats him and when than many other viewers.

[sangh0]

59. I find that hard to believe

Please note, I started out as perfectly content to have Kerry as a candidate and frequently defending him.

Having debated with you about gay marriage, immediately preceding the debate, I find it hard to believe that you were "perfectly content to have Kerry as a candidate" seeing as how your participation in the gay marriage was most certainly NOT "defending" Kerry

[diamondsoul]

64. I did say "started out"

I didn't mention a time frame.

The gay marriage position was a recent revelation on Senator Kerry's part and one of many I find disappointing. Disblelieve all day, but run a search prior to this month about Senator Kerry's IWR vote, and you'll find a number of my posts defending his position. A few criticizing statements he's made along the campaign trail, but most defending Senator Kerry as a strong voice for progressive/liberal views.

For that matter run a search of my posts prior to this month with the name Kerry in them and most will be positive.

[littlejoe]

69. I couldn't agree more .

[mzmolly]

21. I think Dennis wanted to put Kerry on the spot and Kerry didn't let him

control the debate. Dennis used to do the same thing to Dean.

Kerry handled him well IMHO.

[youngred]

23. little dismissive

but not nearly as bad as Larry F*ng King

[rwheeler31]

25. no

nt

[KC21304]

27. It's not going to work here anymore than it did in the debate thread.

The Yahoo link you put up there says the same thing that Kerry said tonight. I see you didn't put the link up here.
Kerry said we need 40,000 more military, he didn't say he wanted to put 40,000 additional troops in Iraq. He didn't lie, as you said in the debate thread. It isn't that hard to understand.

[Vas Liz]

31. He lied

as far as denying knowledge of the claim (even IF Dennis had it wrong, he KNEW what statement of his Dennis had "wrong". I knew. You knew. Do I know Kerry's statements better than he knows them him self?) and you know it. Kerry KNEW what statement of his Dennis was talking about, but he acted like he had no clue.

You seem to think I have so much a problem with a "lie" about the substance of the actual question given to Kerry in regards to the 40,000 troops comment. (which I do to a degree) But the actual problem, which you refuse or fail to recognize, is the fact that Kerry acted like he had no idea what comment of his Dennis was talking about. THAT was the lie.

[WitchWay]

46. 40,000

He wanst 40,000 more military in his first 100 days in office.
I am even MORE worried if they are not going to Iraq, because what are the preparations for?

And here is what Hilary Clinton is up to, interesting coincidence:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4372246/

Try to figure THAT one out.

[DemBones DemBones]

28. Kerry needs to watch himself -- all of them talked over DK, AS USUAL

Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.

Larry King 's treatment of Dennis was unprofessional and inexcusable. Sharpton was allowed to talk, Kucinich wasn't.

[emulatorloo]

54. DK still got some great stuff in

Frankly ROn and Larry talked over all of them and it was realllllllllllly annnnoying. Way worse than the dumb bell thing, and really unneccesary

But I thought DK did great, given the limitations they imposed on him. . , He was clear, concise, on message, took no sh*t from Larry, and got really terrific audience response.

[turnhardleft]

29. Complete and total disrespect by Kerry to Dennis

At least Dennis had and honest message and eyebrows that still function.

[lams712]

32. I don't think Dennis looked like neither an idiot or liar.....

....Kerry is the one who looked bad when Dennis called him out.

I respect Kerry and would vote for him if he is the nominee, but I hope this kind of crap doesn't happen again.

[Vas Liz]

33. I agree

I don't my self think he looked like an idiot/liar knowing what I know. However, to the typical viewer watching who is not very familiar with the candidates or what they may have said in the past, Dennis could have easily looked like an idiot and/or liar because of Kerry's ill treatment. This is especially true considering the media (and other candidates...) always silence him or pretend he doesn't exist.

[diamondsoul]

35. Kerry was absolutely

f*cking nauseatingly arrogant. I've been pissed since he went off on the use of Clinton as an excuse for his IWR vote (Uhhh...am I the ONLY one who knows that BS is RWer tactic? Keerist, just blame it on Cliton's cock next time!!!)

THEN as if that didn't boil my blood enough, I watched every effin' time Kucinich opened his mouth the cameras stayed on a side-shot of Kerry so the home viewers got a nice little taste of his condescending and dismissive little chuckle.

G-dammit, Kerry will have my vote in November if he's the nominee but so help me he will also be dealing with my absolute WRATH every time he slips up even the tiniest little bit! Nevermind that after that little display I'll have to race out of the polling place to puke!:puke: :grr: :nuke:

[truizm]

36. Agreed..but unlike you, if he keeps doing this shit

I don't know if I can vote for him.

[ByRillYAN]

39. I know what you mean,

but its still got to be ABB.
Kerry, IMO, is nowhere near the best candidate, but he is still ten times better than bush. and despites what nader may say, i do see quite a big dif. between Kerry and Bush.
no matter what happens, we need to unite under ABB first, and then fight over that person is.

[liberty rising]

38. Kerry and Larry King--arrogant and ignorant

So was Edwards.....I've lost respect for all three. They were dismissive, rude and obnoxious...all three owe Kucinich an apology.

They must all feel mighty threatened by the truth and integrity that is reflective of Kucnich--reflective of who he is and what he stands for. Kucinich was the only candidate tonight trying to discuss real, substantive issues, and he was systematically dismissed

It made me sick.

Kucinich is the only healing force on the ticket.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you--then you win." --Gandhi

KUCINICH FOR PRESIDENT

[newyawker99]

63. Hi liberty rising!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[littlejoe]

71. Kerry looked and sounded presidential, not arrogant!

[emulatorloo]

40. re #1 Kerry had already answered that

"right way" being let inspections continue, work w UN on sanctions, and that bush didnt do that.

Dennis just interrupted him, and seemed kinda snarky. . .trying to score a point by twisting JKs words.

Don't get me wrong, I love DK, I thought he had some great things to say, and he did get time to say them. . .but I thought in this he was out of line. However, I don't think JK wants or needs an apology from Dennis.

[WitchWay]

48. Hasn't answered a lot of things...

I think that Kerry needs to be HOUNDED to express his opinion on the war. It shouldn't be so unclear. He isn't acting anti-war, and he shouldn't try to trick people into thinking he IS anti-war.

What did Kerry do when it became obvious that bush was doing this (wrong) war in a "WRONG" way? What was wrong with him? Did the cat have his tongue? Why couldn't he go and protest like those who were opposed to the war DID?

IF he thought that it was a "RIGHT" war -- why the hell didn't he do his research?

Kerry NEEDS to be forced to answer to his silent support of the war.

[emulatorloo]

51. JK did speak out, over and over/ wasnt "silent"- repugs attacked him -

for being unpatriotic - just wasn't covered much. . . .he spoke out again and again.

here are some DU threads w quotes from those speeches etc

mb7588a did a thread called A History of Kerry's Words Related to His IWR Vote

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1895

Dr. Funkenstein did a nice thread here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=248417

[WitchWay]

62. JK needs to oppose the corporate war in Iraq

John Kerry needs to oppose the corporate war in Iraq and develop a plan that will take troops out immediately, or he needs to stop pretending to be anti-war on this issue. He needs to answer, instead of dodge, questions. He seems to think that there is a "right" way to go to war, after all.
John Kerry's talk can't impress me because I understand the subtext, and I don't think its okay to hush up when there are people who are dying.
So, I know that some say he has spoken up, but he doesn't seem to completely oppose this war. No wonder, the Clintons were also busy bombing in Iraq and Serbia. So, Kerry's attacks on bush, his roundabout language and carefully worded rhethoric don't impress me very much. He's a studied politician on this matter.

[diamondsoul]

65. And I've defended his vote in the past.

That's not the point. What you post, what Funk posts (and I adore Funk, btw!) is NOT an response from Senator Kerry to a query by a co-candidate in this race. IOW it means nothing in the context of last night's debate (if you can call it that without barfing.)

[diamondsoul]

49. Considering how often DK was dismissed

while still speaking, I'd say he was trying to pull a Sharpton and get in where he saw an opportunity. I'm betting he'd have followed up if Kerry had deigned to answer with a question about why Senator Kerry didn't go to every imaginable length to ensure it was done the "the right way". See Kucinich had the balls to take Bushco to court when he thought they'd stepped on the domain of Congress. Where were Kerry and Edwards?

[emulatorloo]

53. see my post above to Witchway w links

JK wasnt silent he did criticize he was attacked for it by repugs. He called for "regime change in Washington" However it didn't get much coverage. . .you could say it was marginalized in the same way DK is marginalized by press. . .

(DK was great overall in the debate, don't you think?)

[Vas Liz]

97. BS

The only reason he called for regime change at home was because he was preparing for his campaign. He voted for Iraq because he gambled voting against it would hurt his chances when he ran. He gambled wrong, and he gambled away the lives of hundreds of americans troops and thousands of Iraqi civilians. But hey, what's a couple thousand lives when JK needs to win an election?

[WitchWay]

107. debate.

a regime change in Washington? So that he could be the new regime?

As for the debate...
I don't think that DK got to be in it at all. I wish there were real debates, too. These aren't really debates.

[WI_DEM]

41. it is just the way Kerry is

which is why he will probably turn off the electorate once they wake up and start focusing on the race in November.

[turnhardleft]

42. Yes Kerry was arrogant and rude as usual

Kerry acted like the anointed one he is and untouchable or reachable. I don't want another pompous president that thinks he is better than the people that vote for him.

[CWebster]

45. Like the smug arrogant elistist prick he is.

Yes.

[littlejoe]

72. My, my. I guess you don't like the man.

[littlejoe]

79. I don't believe I have enough cheese to go with all this whine!

[youngred]

90. The Whine? It's leftovers

From all the Kerry is being attacked threads, we just hauled it in here for a little while

[bigtree]

86. "Braying of arrogant brass . . .

". . . whimper of querulous reeds."
-Sir William Watson (1858–1935)

[TruthWins]

47. Must Protect Dennis

I'm in Dennis' congressional district and will always vote for him here, but the constant hand-wringing in this forum about the treatment of his candidacy is ridiculous. As he says "I'm electable if you vote for me." People aren't voting for him. He's not even going to do well in Ohio and not even all that well in his home district. He's too left to be president, why is this so hard to accept?

[IrateCitizen]

50. That's not the part that's hard to "accept"

The part that's hard to accept is when I open up the NYT and they pretend that Dennis doesn't even exist. The part that's hard to accept is that he is the sole candidate who is running for the purpose of injecting new, vibrant ways of thinking about our problems and coming up with solutions to them -- and he's just outright ignored by the establishment.

As a supporter of his, I really don't care if people consider him too far "left" to be President. That's fine. But considering the way that many of his ideas appeal to people all over the political spectrum, why on earth would you want to run from those ideas like the plague? It just doesn't make sense, if you're seriously interested in changing things for the better.

Unless, of course, your true goal is winning WITHOUT seriously changing things, but rather only tweaking them slightly, in which case it makes PERFECT sense.

[TruthWins]

56. Change

Serious change does not happen overnight. The majority of the population is not ready for wholesale change, which is why candidates on the extremes don't win for president, but can win certain congressional districts that are sympathetic to their issues. People in Cleveland love Dennis, but even we are realistic enough to know he's not the cup of tea of half or more of this country. He has the right to run, but people also have the right to question what he's accomplishing at this point.

Also, just to let you know, there is quite a bit of grumbling locally that Dennis is spending so much time running for a position that he can't win that he has forgotten about his home district and is setting himself up for a tough fight come re-election time. There is also a feeling that by staying in the presidential fight too long, he is turning the pride we have had in seeing him in the presidential debates turning into embarassment over his claims to have a shot at the nomination.

DK is an idealist who deserves respect, but at some point he overstays his welcome.

[IrateCitizen]

58. You're right that change doesn't happen overnight, BUT...

... the capacity for change depends upon at least a willingness to look squarely at the problems we face, rather than being content with nibbling around the edges of them and addressing only symptoms while ignoring the root cause.

When Edwards and Kerry talk about trade, it's all done in terms of tax credits for keeping jobs here, and retraining credits, and the like. However, only Dennis is willing to stand up there and say that the problem is that we give corporate interests TOO MUCH POWER, that they have essentially rigged the game to their own benefit, and that if we want to fix the system we have to acknowledge this truth.

The establishment approach is to continually try and treat a cancer as a headache with a couple of aspirin, hoping that it will go away. While you can't get rid of the cancer overnight, the first step toward really treating it is to at least ACKNOWLEDGE that it is cancer, and to begin some f***ing chemotherapy! Continuing to only give it aspirin -- or perhaps changing your approach and using pennicilin instead -- might address some of the symptoms, but the cancer will remain and continue to grow.

[littlejoe]

73. A rational thought.! How did this happen?

[revcarol]

52. Welcome to DU, TruthWins.

:toast: to many years of activism.

Unfortunately, your screen name gives lie to your words. The truth is that DK is marginalized by the media, by the party, by the DLC, and THAT IS THE TRUTH. So far, this truth is winning.But not forever.

[Ficus]

55. Kerry is making me really hate him

the more time goes on. And I used to be staunchly ABB.

GRRRRR

[littlejoe]

74. I have a feeling you already hated him!

[mvd]

84. It turned me off a little and I'm still ABB

The least Kerry could have done is say something like "I'm sorry, but it's my time."

[Ficus]

85. nope

check my posts. I always was ABB, and still am, a supporter of Kucinich and Edwards (to a degree), however he just rubs me the wrong way sometimes. I remember defending him from the whole "I'm leaving the party" garbage. I even held two polls on USAPATRIOT Act and Wellstone to show how people who hold others up to litmus tests are silly, to defend the guy. But, okay, whatever you say.

[youngred]

91. I kinda concur

He was/is my second choice for over a year....but this is getting ridiculous

[emulatorloo]

57. I thought Dennis did a great job in the debate

given the limitation of the format.

he was on message, clear, concise, made his points and got great audience response in spite of the limited time he was given.

Ron and Larry were way more annoying than the other candidates re Dennis. . .they were basically impatient and interrupting EVERYBODY. Not letting anybody finish. And it wasn't necesssary. . .they spent so much time on Gay Marriage that time was running out for everyhting else

[IrateCitizen]

60. PLEASE MAKE A NOTE OF THIS!!!

they spent so much time on Gay Marriage that time was running out for everyhting else

Make a note of this. Compare this with the faceoff between Dennis Kucinich and Ted Koppel over what the media does to political campaigns -- first they talk about polls, then they talk about fundraising, and issues are lost in the process.

In this instance, rather than talk about the real issues facing the American people, the media has decided to zero in like a laser on a wedge issue that, quite bluntly, only directly affects less than 10% of the American population. Rather than talk about jobs, healthcare or war and peace issues -- they decided to talk about gay marriage.

If the Democrats were going to be smart about this, they would realize that the media is acting in complicity with the GOP's efforts to exploit a wedge issue rather than talk about the more immediate issues like the ones I listed above. They're falling into the trap of allowing the RW and media dictate the terms of debate, rather than simply refusing to play along and point out their hypocrisy, followed by turning the debate back to the issues that really matter.

[MaggieSwanson]

61. YES.

Kerry came across as an snob.

[littlejoe]

66. If Kerry was rude I honestly didn't see it.

[youngred]

92. perhaps because he's your candidate

whom, according to your posts can do no wrong.

[mvd]

83. I doubt that Kerry would have ignored the interruption if..

it was Edwards who did it. I do think that Kerry wants to distance himself from Dennis, and I don't think it's necessary. I think he tells the unpleasant (at least to the frontrunners) truth and these are only debates anyway.