Odd exchange. I won't get into details, but, someone has tried to claim

[blm]

that Kerry and his people are NOT involved with the defense of Murtha or that rally held for him.

[cadmium]

1. Most absurd

slam I have heard yet. Nobody has stuck up for Jack Murtha as pointedly and consistently as John Kerry.

His address at Fanueil Hall in April was prompted by right wing slams against Murtha and the retired generals

Bush slammed Murtha on Veteran's Day and Kerry was right there to slam him back

Does anyone have a copy of Kerry's Veteran's Day comments?

(and nobody has used the word "slam" more in jsut 4 sentences!)

[blm]

2. The claim was that Kerry is not involved in the groups defending Murtha

at the rally yesterday, that he has nothing to do with it.

Either that person is WAY underinformed, or else they are purposely trying to misinform DUers. I just don't understand why they would use the event where everyone is defending a vet TOGETHER to attack a vet like Kerry as discarded character - - pretty odd.

[Mass]

3. His name does not appear in the media. The name that comes out is

Max Cleland. I was actually wondering whether he or his people were actively involved in that somehow.

I imagine the person you are talking about is willingly negative about Kerry, but information is king here. Once again, if Kerry and his people are involved in this, the info is not out and you cant expect people to know. (Max Cleland is not one of Kerry's people).

Here is the AP release on this subject.
http://kdka.com/topstories/local_story_275155316.html

[cadmium]

4. I sent this Senate address to the news desk at kdka

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=249090

John Kerry Speaks on Senate Floor, Responds To Sickening Attacks on Decorated Veteran Rep. Jack Murtha

Today Senator John Kerry spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Kerry responded to Republican attacks on Congressman Jack Murtha.

Below are Senator Kerry’s remarks, as prepared:
“Mr. President, yesterday, Jack Murtha, a respected congressman on military matters, and former Marine Drill Sergeant and decorated Vietnam veteran, spoke out on our policy in Iraq. He didn’t come to that moment lightly. He spoke his mind and spoke his heart out of love for his country and support for our troops. I am not going to stand for a swift boat attack strategy against Jack Murtha.
“It disgusts me that a bunch of guys who have never put on the uniform of their country venomously turn their guns on a marine who served his country heroically in Vietnam and has been serving heroically in Congress ever since.
“No matter what J.D. Hayworth says, there is no sterner stuff than the backbone and courage that defines Jack Murtha’s character and conscience.
“Dennis Hastert - the Speaker of the House who never served - called Jack Murtha a coward and accused him of wanting to cut and run. Well let me tell you, Jack Murtha wasn’t a coward when he put himself in harm’s way for his country in Vietnam and earned two purple hearts - he was a patriot then, and he is a patriot today. Jack Murtha didn’t cut and run when his courage in combat earned him a Bronze Star, and his voice should be heard, not silenced by those who still today cut and run from the truth.
“Just a day after Dick Cheney, who had 5 deferments from Vietnam, accused Democrats of being unpatriotic -the White House accused Jack Murtha of surrendering. Jack Murtha served 37 years in the Marine Corps. He doesn’t know how to surrender - not to enemy combatants, and not to politicians in Washington who say speaking his conscience is unpatriotic.
“Robert Kennedy once said, ‘The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country.’ Chuck Hagel showed he hasn’t forgotten that when he said, ‘The Bush administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them.’ But too many in the Republican Party forgot that long ago. They forgot that asking tough questions isn’t pessimism; it’s patriotism.
“We’ve seen the politics of fear and smear too many times. Whenever challenged, Republican leaders engage in the politics of personal destruction rather than debate the issues. It doesn’t matter who you are. When they did it to John McCain, we saw it doesn’t matter what political party you’re in. When they did it to Max Cleland, we saw it doesn’t matter if your service put you in a wheelchair. And when they did it to Jack Murtha yesterday, perhaps the most respected voice on military matters in all of Congress, we saw that this administration will go to any lengths to crush any dissent.
“Once again, they’re engaged in the lowest form of smear and fear politics because they’re afraid of actually debating a senior congressman who has advised presidents of both parties on how to best defend our country. They’re afraid to debate a decorated veteran who lives and breathes the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor. They’re terrified of actually leveling with the American people about the way they misled America into war, and admitting they have no clear plan to finish the job and get our troops home. Whether you agree with Jack Murtha’s policy or not is irrelevant.
“The truth is there is a better course for our troops and for America in Iraq and I am going to keep fighting until we take that course for the good of our country.
“American families who have lost, or who fear the loss, of their loved ones deserve to know the truth about what we have asked them to do, what we are doing to complete the mission, and what we are doing to prevent our forces from being trapped in an endless quagmire. Our military families understand that open debate about what’s going on in Iraq doesn’t put our troops at risk; it’s the only way to get it right in Iraq so we can get their sons and daughters home.
“I think all of us should be mindful, as the White House yet again engages in character assassination to prevent Americans from listening to the words of military experts, of the consequences we have already endured from the failure to listen.
“When the administration could have listened to General Shinseki and put in enough troops to maintain order, they chose not to. When they could have learned from George Herbert Walker Bush and built a genuine global coalition, they chose not to. When they could have implemented a detailed State Department plan for reconstructing post-Saddam Iraq, they chose not to.
“When they could have protected American forces by guarding Saddam Hussein’s ammo dumps where there were weapons of individual destruction, they exposed our young men and women to the ammo that now maims and kills them because they chose not to act. When they could have imposed immediate order and structure in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam, Rumsfeld shrugged his shoulders, said Baghdad was safer than Washington, D.C. and chose not to act. When the Administration could have kept an Iraqi army selectively intact, they chose not to. When they could have kept an entire civil structure functioning to deliver basic services to Iraqi citizens, they chose not to.
“When they could have accepted the offers of the United Nations and individual countries to provide on the ground peacekeepers and reconstruction assistance, they chose not to. When they should have leveled with the American people that the insurgency had grown, they chose not to. Vice President Cheney even absurdly claimed that the ‘insurgency was in its last throes.’
“And now, after all these mistakes, who is the administration to accuse anyone of wanting to cut and run. We are in trouble today precisely because of a policy of cut and run. This administration made the wrong choice to cut and run from sound intelligence and good diplomacy; to cut and run from the best military advice; to cut and run from sensible war time planning; to cut and run from their responsibility to properly arm and protect our troops; to cut and run from history’s lessons about the Middle East; to cut and run from common sense. That is the debate they are afraid to have in our country. Shame on them.
“Instead of letting his cronies run their mouths, the President should finally find the courage to debate the real issue instead of destroying anyone who speaks truth to power as they see it. It’s time for Americans to stand up, fight back, and make it clear it’s unacceptable to do this to any leader of any party anywhere in our country.
“And I hope my colleagues will come down to this floor and debate the issue on its merits, instead of attacking the character of a man like Jack Murtha, because believe me - that’s a fight nobody’s going to win in our America.”

[Mass]

5. After having read the exchange in GD or GDP, I think

this is a reasonnable claim.

While Kerry spoke strongly about the attacks against Murtha, he is not linked directly to any of these groups.

VetPac is linked to Clark, Hackett, and others.
Patriot Project was started by people very close to Kerry, if I remember correctly, but he is not directly involved in that.
Same thing for the third group you quote.
I was wondering why he did not associate himself to one of these groups.

This said, the person is a strong Clark supporter and does not want his thunder to be stolen by Kerry.

[karynnj]

7. Nice summary - that Kerry is NOT involved

is not a negative. He has provided a lot of support in the past. It is entirely reasonable for others to defend Murtha as well - not being involved is not a problem.

[Mass]

9. It is not a negative, but blm somehow was implying that JK and his people

were involved, and this is what created the negative reaction in the thread I read.

There may be plenty of valid reasons for Kerry not to be involved directly, but in this case, it is difficult to claim that he is.

On edit: TayTay gave us a very valid reason for Kerry not to be involved that I had forgotten.

[blm]

12. I said Kerry's "people" are involved in the start of these groups and

Kerry has been supporting them since their beginnings.

For the poster to claim that the people involved are not from the Kerry camp is just false. And Kerry, being an elected official, can only do so much with any 527 group.

[beachmom]

13. Well, when I think Patriot Project, I think Kerry

Although he is not directly involved with them, his presence can be felt there, and the work they do. If PP was involved, that means Kerry's got Murtha's back, including yesterday.

Edited to add: okay, they're a 527 (thanks Tay), so he most certainly is NOT involved directly. But the values he holds dear are being upheld there. Those are very good friends of his there.

[TayTay]

14. It is sane and logical to assume that people who worked

on the '04 election and were horrified by what was done to Kerry would band together to try to prevent this from happening to another Democratic Veteran running for office. It is my understand that the Judy Droz Keyes has her name on this group. She has obvious ties to John Kerry. She is also able to express outrage on her own.

Perhaps people learned something from '04 when they were seriously upset about what happened to Kerry and have found a way to channel that outrage through various groups on the web, including 527s. The real question to ask is why someone would be proprietary about this and try and suggest that someone is not supporting this. This is yet another way to discredit veterans, this time within the Democratic Party and is also reprehensible and deserving of a reprimand.

[blm]

15. Kerry's name can't be directly a part of it, but many of the same people

involved in his camp are also part of these groups.

And Kerry has helped promote these groups since their beginnings - for anyone to claim that Kerry has nothing to do with these groups, they are being misleading, and possibly DELIBERATELY misleading.

[karynnj]

6. self delete - as Murtha comments already posted

[Mass]

8. The claim was that Kerry and Kerry's people were not part of the different

groups that were created to support veterans.

As I said earlier, while I found people who are close of Kerry, particularly Max Cleland, it is difficult to state that they are doing that on Kerry's demand, particularly when it comes to Max who had his own problems in 2002.

Is there anything that links directly Kerry to these groups? Something that says he has helped to create or finance them rather than simply list people who are close from him.

[TayTay]

10. No there is no direct link to a 527

Ahm, by law there cannot be. They are 527's. Whoever is bringing this up as an issue is profoudly ignorant of how this stuff works. John Kerry has his own PAC that is giving money to vets running for office. He also once solicited a donation for another leadership PAC, the votevets.org one.

Sen. Kerry has his own PAC and is raising money under his own name to give to vets like Tammy Duckworth and others.

Whoever is writing this stuff is killing the truth with 'white lies' by stating that the Senator is not directly involved. Well duh, he can't be by law. Wes Clark has no such prohibitions, he doesn't hold public office at the moment.

[Mass]

11. I had forgotten this little detail. Thank you.