The Hill on Kerry-Reed press conference

[MH1]

You be the judge.

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/121405/reed.html

[WildEyedLiberal]

1. So I guess a future Kerry run means anything he says now is suspect?

Jesus, I'm getting so sick of that meme.

"Hey, only politicians who have no desire to actually obtain a leadership position to implement the policies they think are best for America are allowed to have plans. Those of you with plans who actually seek higher office to make a difference: forget it, everything you say - and don't say - is just political positioning."

:grr:

Jack Reed seems like a very cool guy, and I'm sure he was HAPPY to have Kerry there, if nothing else to draw more attention to the press conference than (bless his little heart) obscure Jack Reed would've by himself.

[wisteria]

4. I agree with you. I read something earlier today and got the

impression Reid has decided to tone down the rhetoric. Personally, I have my doubts about this decision. Yeah, Reed may have the credentials but IMO, he isn't going to attract much attention. Same with Levin. Kerry was out there saying what needed to be said and he was blasted by the Republicans, but that is to be expected and at least the message was getting out. Now, I'm not so sure. I didn't notice much MSM time given to the Dem's today on the Iraqi issue.

[jenndar]

9. I'm frustrated, too.

JK's press conference with Reed got so much attention. Granted, some of it was negative, but I think that's something we can all live with if it brings focus back to what's wrong in Iraq and what can be done about it. To some people, JK still is the standard-bearer on this issue, and to minimize that is unfortunate.

[ProSense]

6. You're so right! This is all positioning.

It doesn't matter a damn what the Democrats do. The shit the media decides to focus on is ridiculous. Reed would never have gotten much play without Kerry. Think about it, unlike Murtha, this is about Kerry's positioning and not what Reed said. Why is that?


Now McCain is attacking Murtha:

More McCain Attacks: Murtha ‘Sentimental,’ ‘Never Been a Big Thinker’
On Sunday, Sen. John McCain — regularly lauded for his nonpartisan “straight talk” — attacked Rep. John Murtha for having “become too emotional” over the Iraq war.

McCain was simply repeating the line he had given Byron York in an interview for the New Republic. That piece is now online, and as you’ll see below, McCain was even more personal when speaking to York:

John Murtha is “a lovable guy,” but “he’s never been a big thinker; he’s an appropriator.” Using language that Bush never could, McCain tells me that Murtha has become too emotional about the human cost of the war. “As we get older, we get more sentimental,” McCain says. “And has been very, very affected by the funerals and the families. But you cannot let that affect the way you decide policy.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/06/mccain-murtha/

[Blaukraut]

2. sad

What might have been a very positive article was ruined by the inevitable snark. Are the media really that hell-bent on putting JK in the worst possible light? He must pose a pretty big threat to them.

[ProSense]

7. This is where the focus should be

The media is completely distorting the record. From the article:

Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, has been so eager to remain his party’s standard-bearer that a recent Reed response to a Bush speech became a Kerry-Reed event.


This is the only thing they have to report? What the hell does this have to do with a plan?


I started a thread in this group with a letter I sent to Time after a horrible article by Joe Klein. I posted some other letters I found in in an NJ paper.

Reason for this is, I keep reading and hearing from people exactly the opposite of what the media keeps pushing. And especially this notion about the Democrats.


The media is either out of touch or intentionally ignoring the facts. Do they read? Forget that, do they hear? I found this letter today (which is very telling):


Pleasantville Student Speaks Out On Iraq Issues
Shannon Broder
Wednesday, 14 December 2005
Letter to the Editor:
We are still fighting in the Iraq war, but it's difficult to tell because it is a topic that has been ostracized by many newspapers. The articles are there, you just need to go through pages upon pages of ads and other senseless articles to reach the so-called "roll of honor" page, a page that is supposed to venerate our soldiers.

How are we supposed to fully appreciate or understand what is going on in Iraq if the information is not readily available?

The death toll of American soldiers in Iraq has amounted to well over two thousand lives. These men and women sacrificed their lives for their country and yet the "roll of honor" has been pushed to the back of the paper. Some honor that is. These are our fellow Americans, and hiding the cold hard facts is not going to make this war go away.

Due to the conflict in Iraq and other mishaps, President Bush's popularity ratings have plummeted. His number of supporters now stands at 38%, the lowest of his presidency yet. President Bush won the popular vote on November 2nd by a 50.7% to 48.2% margin over John Kerry. It is most unfortunate that the 1.7% of Americans that could have made such a difference on Election Day are having second thoughts after the fact when it is too late. What a shame they didn't feel compelled to look up the facts in time.

What now, America? We cannot just close our eyes and pretend that this war isn't here and that our people aren't dying. We, as Americans, need to take a stand for what is right.

Shannon Broder
Student
Pleasantville N.Y.

http://westchester.com/Westchester_News/Westchester_Views_and_Opinion/Pleasantville_Student_Speaks_Out_On_Iraq_Issues_200512146032.html

[globalvillage]

3. This is a problem.

Any good coach knows that you only put the second string in when you're either too far ahead to lose or too far behind to win.
When it's this close, you need to keep your players in the game.
This is 'the show', not the minors.

[wisteria]

5. Hi GV, I agree with you and IMO we are not far enough ahead

to be doing this. Actually, I think we are losing ground. Sometimes our party is so frustrating.

[ProSense]

10. The Democratic Party

I'm sure wants to let everyone be heard. Similar to what they did when they pulled out all the big guns and some others on the Social Security issue, that's what they need to keep doing. That was a totally effective strategy. It got a lot of play (look at who was out in front), created quite a stir and resulted in a beat down of Bush's scheme.

Instead, they're giving the media the upper hand by holding back and spreading the response too thin. Unlike Social Security, the cohesion on the Iraq issue is not the same, but the basic premise "Bush's strategy sucks" is there. So they can rally in the same way around that basic premise and demand accountability.

[Mass]

8. What they do not explain is why the Dems turn to Reed

It follows exactly Reid's strategy which is to keep the caucus in agreement by having as the frontfigure somebody who is ready to call Bush on his mismanagement of the crisis, but will not propose to withdraw troops and do not have presidential ambitions.

This does not prevent other Dems to say what they have to say, but not as the official Democratic response.

However, the problem is that the media will ignore him as they have ignored him last week, and this because he is not high profile and polemical enough.