Just how is Kerry advancing his chances in 2008

[Surya Gayatri]

by leading a filibuster attempt? I don't get the Corp. Media spin that he's just doing this to stay in the public eye and raise his profile in anticipation of another run in 2008?

How the hell can this full-frontal media pack attack do anything to help his so-called 'presidential ambitions'?

As if he needs any more of their tender attentions--painting him as an elitist Don Quixoté jousting with the Repub wind machine.

I see a truly concerned legislator, willing to walk the talk, who on the contrary is willing to risk his political future to do the right thing.

Am I missing something here? Can somebody enlighten me? :think: :shrug:

edit: layout

[applegrove]

1. Somehow. By backing a good part of his base on an issue, this elected

official is playing politics. While the big oil funded churches who publish a kind of christianity that hates gays and equate "secular humanists"=liberals with the worst kind of evil... well that is just every day life.

Shouldn't the politicians be responsive the politics and the churches not?

When everyting is backwards... you have some nefarious manipulators on the job.

[Surya Gayatri]

5. You know, apple,

I often get the feeling that we've fallen down a rabbit hole and are trapped in a reverse world--or that God is somehow following the script of '1984' right now. Everything is upside down, back to front, inside out. Very disconcerting for an American abroad observing this from a distance. SG

[applegrove]

6. Yes. That is what it is like. It is backwards. You'll get used to it.

Though it hurts quite a bit. You grieve the loss and then you soldier on.

[Surya Gayatri]

8. Forge on yes, but how to keep our bearings

in this madness? Only our inner consciences can be a reliable guide now. SG

[applegrove]

35. Just be yourself. And grieve. Important to cry. Gets rid of anger. You

wake up accepting all the losses. I don't think consciousness are inner. It is ususally pretty obvious if you are a good egg or not. Integrity means integration. So knowing ourselves and being authentic is the best way. So our consciences cannot be fooled. They guide us. But your conscience should go all the way through ya.

[Surya Gayatri]

40. I often have tears in my eyes

blogging away here at my desktop. Tears of frustration, sadness and just sheer disbelief that this can be happening. SG

[applegrove]

42. Yep. You get good at it. And it hurts less and less. And you live to

fight another day.

But you gotta have some balance. So you need to build up volunteerism or something.

[Surya Gayatri]

47. Fortunately, I'm part of a spiritual movement

and gain balance and sustenance through that. If I didn't have a heartfelt conviction that there is a greater Truth behind all of this, and that ultimately, everything is for the best in the grand scheme of things, I'd have real difficulty going on. SG

[applegrove]

48. You find what you need. You end up stronger whichever way you turn.

It's there. Within you or your spiritual guides.. being human is all you need.

[Surya Gayatri]

52. How true, and that seems to be

what the Repub political machine has forgotten--being human first, I mean. SG

[applegrove]

59. Yep. Don't loose that empathy.

[BigYawn]

76. The frustration started on November 3rd, 2004, when they got 55 senators

and the White House. I am already past the sadness. Now
I am in a pragmatic mode. Which is how can we win more
seats in 2006. I will not waste my energies on Alito.
Alito is a lost cause. He got confirmed already on 11/2/2004.
No point in crying over spilled milk.

In case you are not aware the repugs can revise the senate
filibuster rule to require a simple majority (51 votes) to
confirm a nominee to any court. And they need only 51 votes
to revise the rule.

[rodeodance]

17. very distoring even for us back here.

[applegrove]

36. You'll get used to it. Anything that is backwards is a sure sign of

the nefarious at play in your world. Know yourself. Grive. Cut your losses. Get the anger out. Cry. And wake up ready to face a new day.

[no_more_rhyming]

53. Kerry is old school, any press is better than NO press.

He is finally standing FOR something, instead of against someone.

[Surya Gayatri]

55. Yes, no_more, I really believe that JK

is in some respects a "gentleman of the old school". There is a dignity and gravitas to him that the younger whippersnappers just don't have, IMHO. SG

BTW, WELCOME TO DU!! GLAD TO HAVE YOU ABOARD! :hi: :toast:

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Corporate media crap

and man, you should've heard the "news analysis" on Friday's PBS Newshour with Lehrer, Bobo Brooks and Mark Shields.

They were a-yukking it up over how Kerry had the audacity to make his original statement of support from the Davos economic conference. Bobo said, "I just wish he'd done it while wind-surfing." har har har.

fuckers.

And Mark, if you're going to carry water for these bastards, just dress up as an elephant next time and put a damn "W" sticker on your forehead.

[Surya Gayatri]

9. I don't have direct access to US teevee, bunker,

which can be a blessing. I only hear about these egregious excesses second hand.

So, I guess I escape some of the hair-pulling frustration. If I watched spew like that on a regular basis, I would've trashed my teevee by now. SG

[AtomicKitten]

3. pay no attention to the "media"

they almost always get it wrong.

The iron is being called the "liberal" media. We wish.

[Meldread]

4. I've committed to not...

...getting involved in this type of thing until after Alito is over and done with. However, I'll answer your question because I am going to take it that you are sincere and not just looking to start a flame war.

Basically, it breaks down like this. John Kerry knows that people like us (the base) can raise a lot of money in small donations. He knows that Hillary (and Mark Warner) are wooing the fat cats of business and that he has little chance in hell to compete against that. So, he turns to us and says, 'Hey look I'm fighting Alito!' That would, of course, not only gain him support when it comes time to vote in 2008 but will also give him something to campaign on. Hillary saw this move, and knowing that such a filibuster was likely to fail decided to jump on board, which will of course allow her to say the same thing.

To put it simply... Democrats are afraid Alito might turn into another Iraq War Vote and want to cover their asses as best they can for 2008.

All the above being said, I am still glad that they are wooing us for our support and it shows that we have power and influence in Washington - however small and meager it may be - and we should use it to our best ability and advantage.

Also to add, what he is doing is just good politics and democratic strategy. It's a smart move. It's politics.

[Surya Gayatri]

7. Thanks for the analysis...

which I suppose to a certain degree is spot on--pols being pols. But it literally pains me to be forced into the belief that nobody does anything anymore out of 'pure' conviction--relatively speaking. I prefer to think, perhaps naively, that their motivations are a complex combination of factors. SG

[Meldread]

11. I agree.

It's sad but true. It may simply be because I am cynical, but I don't think that is the case. Really, politics is all about the money. Ever heard the old saying about the Golden Rule? Those with the gold make the rules. That's also the golden rule of politics.

I mean, in a perfect world people would always do the right thing because it was the right thing. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. We live in a world where if you want to get elected to a political office you have to basically become a prostitute.

It is the same way on the Republican side. Why do you think Republicans are all over gay marriage? Karl Rove himself said that Bush doesn't really give a damn about the issue, it's just what brings in the money and turns out their base. He literally said that. (Well he didn't say Bush didn't give a damn about the issue - he said that Bush wouldn't address the issue or care about the issue were it not popular with the Republican base.)

On our side of the fence, it's the Iraq War and Alito. It's politics. It's also a good move on Kerry's part, very shrewd as it forces Hillary to make a move as well, something that she typically doesn't like to do. (In most cases she likes to ride both sides of an issue until she is forced to pick one, she loves her little strategy of triangulation.) Warner is left out in the cold because he doesn't get a vote on the issue.

Kerry is exclusively playing to us, his base. I mean, he or one of his aids is posting on DailyKOS for Christsake! You can't scream to us any louder than that. :P Kerry wants to basically come into 2008 the same way Howard Dean came into 2004, with lots of money and lots of press and lots of favor with the base. It's a very, very shrewd and smart move on his part. The media is blasting him because... well... they are the media and they are whores for the right, basically. They are also whoring for Hillary big time.

[Surya Gayatri]

15. OK, Kerry needs the support of the base

for anything he decides to do in 2008. But, he shouldn't have to whore for money--he's married to one of the richest women in the US. He & Teresa could finance a run by just selling off a few trust funds. Or is my vision skewed somehow? SG

[Meldread]

19. You are forgetting...

...the fact that he also needs votes. It isn't all about money. Also, you have to imagine how that would look. He did something similar to that in Iowa during the primaries when Howard Dean was soaring high. It earned him A LOT of flack from Dean supporters as he then used that money to attack Dean. There were also charges that Kerry and Gephardt were pooling their money to attack Dean in Iowa. Gephardt did, basically what I believe should be called a "Suicide attack", where he went just hardcore smear campaigning against Dean which in turn screwed himself. (Basically, he did what he could do to kill Dean's campaign and in turn killed his campaign as well.) Everyone knew that whatever happened in Iowa would set the stage for what would happen in the states that followed. It was set up that way, and it's exactly how it worked out.

Candidates also hate drawing attention to the fact that they are rich. Nothing seems to alienate the American people more than to say, "Hey look at me I live in a Mansion and have 50 cars, never have to worry about money... oh wait... you work two jobs and can't even afford healthcare?" It also makes them be perceived as elitist. It also makes it feel that they cannot relate with the common plight of American life. That is why Bush strives for that "common man" approach. He's rich too, obviously, but listening to him speak and looking at the things he does you wouldn't suspect it. It's all carefully chorographed to look that way.

Anyway, rambling a bit. The point of the matter is Kerry needs and wants - and its a good thing - our vote. To get it he's willing to take up our causes and our issues. Politics being politics, I say embrace the man and use him to our best advantage. Turn him into our megaphone in Congress. Keep demanding more and more of him. See how far he is willing to go.

[Surya Gayatri]

32. Re your 2nd paragraph,

I've always been puzzled by this paradox in the American electorate. They want their pols to be "jes down-home types drinkin' a beer down at the local bar & grill", while at the same time being mesmerized with wealth & status (Life Styles of the Rich & Famous). Go figure! The only remaining vestiges of the populist strain in US politics? SG

[Meldread]

38. Yeah I know. It's ironic.

...but very true. I'm not sure I understand it either, considering anyone who is REALLY serious about politics and wants to move high up either has to be well connected or be wealthy.

I think the difference is, though, that when we view the "Life Styles of the Rich and Famous" we are secretly wishing to "aspire" to become them (to live the easy life and to be famous). When we see our political leaders - they are reality. When you see a politician you don't really want to think about their money, you want to think about YOUR money and you want to know what THEY are going to do about it. When you see a politician you really don't want to think about how they have it easy, you want them to think about how HARD you have it and want to know what they are going to do about it.

It makes sense, I suppose, in a certain way. Still, it doesn't mean it's fair - a rich person can be compassionate toward the plight of the less fortunate. I don't think money or status should be held against people who have it, unless they abuse it for the wrong ends. However, that's just me and even I admit that I find myself in favor of those who have less rather than those who have more.

I remember something that really pissed me off in the 2004 Campaign. It was when the media started making fun of Dean for his cheap suits which they said he bought from JCPenny. Talk about feeling alienated and making me like the guy even more! I still remember that they said those suits cost around $75... I also remember something mentioned about a Thrift Shop. Anyway, it really made me feel "closer" to Dean and it still does. Ironic and strange isn't it?

[Surya Gayatri]

50. Thanks for the thoughtful analysis,

although I agree that the paradox is still mind-boggling. Talk about wanting your cake and eating it--or as the French say "having the butter and the price of the butter"! As I've said on other threads, I believe the only way out of this impasse is to cap political campaign spending to even the playing field. I may be naive, but I think that would go some way to bringing us back to issues-based discourse rather than 30-second teevee blitzes. SG

[Epiphany4z]

20. Whatever the reasons

I am glad he is doing it. I do agree this has got to be one hell of a fund raiser for anyone onboard.

Alito is good place to make a stand he is bad news for both sides and sadly but to our advantage it will become apparent after he is confirmed.

[Meldread]

25. Well I kinda disagree.

First, in regards to money there is only so much to go around. The more people who pile on board the more diluted the pool of money becomes. You have to remember that most of the money that pours in from the left is from everyday people in $50 donations. When you add up the number of people donating the number is huge. However, if you spread that out among a large number of candidates the pool shrinks. We're just every day folks - we don't have enough money to throw at everyone - even though I'm sure most of us would love to have enough to do so. So there is competition for our resources.

I also disagree about Alito being bad news for both sides. The radical right wants Alito for all the qualities that you and I would label as "bad". They want him to eliminate civil liberties and freedom. They want him to outlaw abortion. They want him to do all the things you and I don't want him to do. It will not sit well with Moderate Republicans, of course, who are very strongly against those things... but they don't bring in the bacon like the radical right so they are getting ignored. (To the countries detriment.)

[Epiphany4z]

67. I disagree

"irst, in regards to money there is only so much to go around. The more people who pile on board the more diluted the pool of money becomes. You have to remember that most of the money that pours in from the left is from everyday people in $50 donations. When you add up the number of people donating the number is huge. However, if you spread that out among a large number of candidates the pool shrinks. We're just every day folks - we don't have enough money to throw at everyone - even though I'm sure most of us would love to have enough to do so. So there is competition for our resources."

I think this has motivated people who don't normally donate to give. It is red meat...its a drop in a bucket..I think its a good thing.



"They want him to eliminate civil liberties and freedom"....


maybe the big repubs but the little guy they have fooled doesn't really want to loose his freedom and liberties. They just don't seem to get what this judge really stands for ..My own freeper brother just wants Alito because of abortion and the dem opposition is just being mean we made his wife cry after all...my freeper aunt its about the abortion thing...they really don't get what this guy wants to do...you don't hear about it on the news..why should they know...what little they hear they believe is left wing propaganda .

ehh maybe im just not cynical enough yet...but I see this judge as bad for America therefor bad for both republicans and Democrats. I know they wont care till there young college minded kid can't her abortion..or a Democrat gets in office with all the power this judge believes the president should have but its still bad for everyone. People just don't get that it is not only Democrat women that wont be able to get abortion this judge is not going to make rules that only effect liberals.

Not everyone is on line posting on a blog while watching c-span and listening to air america..joe average hears the evening news and goes on with life taking that to be the truth... I truly believe they are being fleeced and this judge is bad for both sides.

[bklyncowgirl]

10. Also Kerry glances to his left and sees Russ Feingold & the shadow of Gore

Kerry's smart enough that enough of the base--rightly or wrongly--are pissed with him over his capitulation on Ohio. He also knows there's just not a whole lot of enthusiasm for him among corporate donors.

Looking over on his left he sees Feingold taking the lead on the Patriot act, making himself the darling of the left blogosphere. Then there's Al Gore who stands to be able to jump in with mainstream recognition, a powerful message and a chance to right the wrong that was done to him in Florida.

When Kerry blogged on Kos he got an earful about spineless Democrats. He knew many of us were waiting for someone to lead on this issue--he saw his chance.

Kerry could have kept his head down like so many others are doing but he's decided to roll the dice.

Good for him.

[Meldread]

13. Yep. It's a very smart and shrewd move on his part.

I mean, anyone who says politics isn't involved in his choice really doesn't know a thing about politics. *EVERY* choice a politician makes is based on politics, especially at the National Level.

Kerry might honestly feel that Alito is bad for the country as well, and probably does, but his move is more based on politics and strategy for 2008 than what he feels is right or wrong.

[WildEyedLiberal]

73. I don't agree

Yes, it may be good politics, but to say that there is not genuine conviction there first and foremost is to completely ignore Kerry's floor statements and passion. If he didn't believe in his heart that Alito was a disaster, he wouldn't be doing this. He is not a popular "politician" because he follows his instinct about issues - including the Iraq War Resolution, which he truly believed would help curtail Bush's authority by forcing him to go through the UN. Of course, Bush ignored that part of the IWR, so that was a bad call by Kerry, but the point is, he knew he had serious liberal credentials from his past (anti-Vietnam war, etc), and jeopardized them to vote his conscience, to try to keep Bush in check on Iraq. It hurt him politically, but he did not pander. And he is not pandering now.

[Surya Gayatri]

81. Indeed, Wild, "panderer" is one

qualifier I would never apply to JK! Many others, including "long-winded", "overly even-handed", but never that! SG

[Surya Gayatri]

16. I say 'good for him' too, cowgirl...

There are a lot of other high-profile issues he could have used to stay in the media spotlight. He didn't have to jump through this ring of fire.

I genuinely believe that he's doing this at least partly out of conviction and not just political calculation. SG

[Skidmore]

12. They are trying to denigrate any attempt to block a nominee to the SC

who is sympathetic to the interests of corporations. These people are part of *'s base. This is about money for them. In that interest, they will provide support to the arguments of the RR and any other kook group that comes along and identifies themselves as part of that base.

[Surya Gayatri]

18. Yes, the media marionettes' 'hidden agenda' is becoming

less and less subtle. It's make or break time for their Corporate string-pullers, who know their free-wheeling ways will be reigned in if and when the Dems retake at least one branch of government. SG

edit typo

[KainNero]

14. dems arent

going to nominate him again are they? I mean they are most likely going to go for someone else, a fresh face right?

[Surya Gayatri]

22. Too early to say, Kain, but both he & Gore

have "elder statesman" status within the general public--although, as you say, the American electorate tend to prefer "NEW & IMPROVED MODELS" (the case of Tricky Dick Nixon notwithstanding). SG

[Meldread]

23. Uhh...

...basically here are the choices you'll have in 2008:
John Kerry
Mark Warner
Hillary Clinton

Those are the big three. After them you have some "maybe" folks:
Russ Feingold
Al Gore

There may be one or two others, but it's almost guaranteed that one of those I just listed are going to win. All of them are Democratic Party heavy weights. Personally, I'd be happy to throw my lot in with any of them besides Mark Warner and Hillary Clinton, ironically the two most favored by the American Media. The Media seems to be whoring for Hilary and Warner pretty hard right now which is, to be blunt, disgusting.

[Surya Gayatri]

28. Yes, they're going at it hammer and

tongs--which IMHO makes her ever more suspect & undesirable. I believe the Repubs would love to face her in 2008. Kerry was swiftboated, but just wait till they launch the "Queen Mary" of smear against her. Hillary will be drowned in the wake. SG

edit typo

[Meldread]

34. Well, I'm not sure if that'll happen.

Hillary is a smart politician. You never want to underestimate her - despite all her moral short comings she is a very intelligent woman. Case in point, she was quick to notice what John Kerry was doing and jumped on board. She hasn't been very vocal, she's letting Kerry do that, so he takes the heat. If his "gamble" backfires then he'll take the brunt of the impact and she can sit back and weather the storm. If it succeeds she can step up and say, "Look! I did it too!" If it becomes popular with the left and becomes a major factor in how we will vote in 2008 she will do the same thing.

It's triangulation, and despite all of Kerry's shrewdness for this move I have to wonder if he hasn't been outwitted by Hillary in the end. I'm sure she was pissed that he came out in favor of the filibuster as she simply wanted to vote no on Alito and leave it at that. I can only imagine being in a room when those two manage to find themselves alone - I'd love to be a fly on the wall at that moment.

Really, all the heeing and hawing over if we should filibuster or not has little to do with Alito and more about Democratic Strategy in 2006 and 2008 and how it's going to play out. I think the only ones voting out of a firm conviction are Byrd and a small handful of Republicans - all who really do want to outlaw abortion and block the possibility of gay marriage becoming law in America through the Justice System. (Which, frankly, makes them the lowest of the low. At least those who are voting for Alito out of political advantages aren't people who are personal scumbags, but I digress... it's another issue all together.)

[Surya Gayatri]

61. An absolutely brilliant tactician and board player is Hillary,

but as somebody said in a recnet blog: "She can never outrun the legacy of Bill"--he'll be the giant donkey in the room, either to her benefit or detriment, depending on your perspective.

And yes, I'd love to hold a glass to the wall and listen in to Hillary & JK's "animated" debate, too! SG

[Surya Gayatri]

54. Kain, forgot to extend a hearty DU "Welcome aboard"!

:hi: :toast: SG

[H2O Man]

21. The media is simply

trying to shift the focus, because there are forces behind them that does not want a national debate on Alito.

[Surya Gayatri]

24. Bingo, waterman,

"LOOK OVER HERE, not over there!" Shoot down the messenger, but cover your
ears to the message. Obfuscate, divert, hoodwink.

SG :thumbsdown:

[H2O Man]

26. The effort to keep people

thinking about 2008, instead of 2006, is "old hat" for the corporate machine. Malcolm used to say that if you trust the media, you will be carrying an umbrella on a sunny day, and getting soaked when it rains. Today's forecast shouldn't be about a Kerry campaign in '08, but about the danger posed by the darkness of the conservative storm on the Constitution, today.

[Surya Gayatri]

31. Yes, it'd almost be funny

if it weren't so detrimental to public debate. To listen to or read the CORP. MEDIA, you'd hardly know there's a landmark election coming in 10 months. And the benighted, benumbed public is none the wiser. SG

[H2O Man]

33. Right.

If a person subscribed to the nonsense on Fox News, they would think that John Kerry has no reason to oppose His Honesty Alito, and was nothing more than an opportunist. I believe that 2006 is the most important year in our nation's history, and that we are either going to draw a line in the sand and protect our constitutional democracy, or watch it go down the drain. I think that the recent actions by John Kerry and Al Gore recognize that, also, and that both are taking what steps they can within the context of their positions, to oppose that threat to our country.

This is a very interesting thread. Thank you for it.

[Surya Gayatri]

37. I know this in my mind & feel it in my heart, waterman,

this is Rubicon time--the devil is now on the shore facing that deep blue sea. WE MUST ALL STAND UP IN FORCE AND SAY LOUD AND CLEAR--¡NO PASARAN!

Glad you enjoyed my questions. The replies are just as interesting for me. I'm trying to get my brain around what the hell's happening to the country I grew up in. SG

[Meldread]

29. Agreed.

That's why I've been silent on political motivations, this thread being the exception. I just think it's interesting to discuss, and our focus should be where it counts which is on 2006 and Alito. Still, I also believe that we should always keep ourselves keenly aware of the politics that are playing out around us so that we can use them to our best advantage.

[H2O Man]

30. Well said.

I agree 100%.

[Totally Committed]

27. Not everyone is impressed with this filibuster business...

This move is not being viewed across the blogoshere unanimously as the altruistic and courageous stand that most here see it has. In the interest of presenting an opposing view, there is this blog:

January 27, 2006
Meet The New Kerry, Same As The Old Kerry

Greg writes:

If Kerry was serious about mounting a filibuster, why didn't he get Reid on board? Why did he wait until he was in Switzerland to announce it? If you think Alito's extreme enough to filibuster, why not get the ball rolling earlier in the week?

It's a scam folks. The Democrats may see the attempts to block Alito as the equivalent of putting a speedbump in front of a runaway train, but even their half-assed opposition is only a facade to ensure that we, the liberal base, stay calm and help deliver the votes in November. They'll turn this defeat into another fundraising appeal, fretting about the out-of-control Republicans while hoping we all forget how much they've folded time and again to the extreme right.

Word. But unlike Greg, I don't blame "Democrats" for this, filibustering was a bad idea with an invisible upshot. You want to stop bad nominees from getting on the Court, you turn out more votes, donate more money, and win more elections than the other guy. A filibuster, in the best case scenario that we win the aftermath, simply sets up the nomination of Michael Luttig. And then we filibuster him? How many times do you think voters will support that? And if your number there is smaller than the number of bad but qualified nominees in this country, then you see my point. If Democratic Senators think Alito is bad, their job is to vote no, it's not an abdication of duty to refuse a quixotic procedural delay.

I do, however, blame Kerry for cynically seeking rapprochement with the left by dangling the hopes of a filibuster he knew would never happen, would never succeed. If he'd truly wanted to stop Alito and had never, as he wrote, doubted that conviction, he shouldn't have been hanging out in Europe when the time came. It's not like the Senate doesn't release it's schedule in advance. As it is, his move not only looked fake, it opened him up to the same accusations of opportunism, ambition, and elitism that helped sink his campaign. has he learned nothing?

Switzerland. Jesus.

http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2006/01/meet_the_new_ke.html

Disclaimer: I am not a Kerry fan and haven't been for a few years. But, to be really honest with you all, there was a part of me that wanted to believe he could pull this off. After reading this blog and thinking about it, I have that old feeling of having been had again, and I'm back where I was again.

I am very sad to see this Party in the position it is in.

TC

[Meldread]

41. I pity you...

...for I have a feeling you are about to be burned alive from the flames. :P

Still, I don't really disagree.

I've pretty much decided to remain silent until AFTER the Alito thing is over, and then raise those points. Some on the left are filled with "filibuster" hope right now, and I find it disheartening that they are going to find that their bubble will burst very soon.

[Surya Gayatri]

44. I don't entirely disagree & am not flaming you, Totally,

but this lesson in "realpolitik" is very painful for me. To allow that no one every acts out of concern for the greater good any longer saddens me no end.

See post N° 7

[Totally Committed]

63. I read your post at #7,

and appreciate so much of what you've said. This whole Party has become a lesson in "Realpolitik" for me and a sad one beyond belief. We have too few heroes, and sadly even those heroes have had to compromise their ideals many times to have been elected. It is a sad truth.

I am fighting for a better day. And I think we are all due a miracle right about now. I hope Kerry pulls this off, but I am not optimistic. And, I have been around long enough to not to be.

Another disclaimer: In the hope this could possibly work, and despite the fact I am not a Kerry fan, I have made all the calls and the faxes, and sent e-mails to everyone in my addressbook in support of this effort.


TC

[Surya Gayatri]

64. May the Gods of Justice smile on

your efforts, made in spite of your lack of enthusiasm. Me too, in the words of the song: "I'm Holdin' Out For A Hero", only he/she hasn't distinguished him/herself from the crowd as yet.


:yourock:


All we can do is keep slogging away and have faith that even the smallest gesture made in good faith adds to the amassing energy for change. SG

[Totally Committed]

66. Amen to that!

And...

:yourock:

right back atcha!

Let's all hold out for a miracle with this filibuster.

TC

[fedupinBushcountry]

46. Funny

how a man that has always fought for the people not the corporate, for transparency not secretiveness, for holding the government accountable ( BCCI, Iran Contra, etc. etc.)is being attacked by the lefty know it alls.

Sad, yes very sad when you put crap like this as a talking point. Oh yes we are hurting and the one's hurting us the most are the Klein's of this party.

Sad also that a man that loves his country and wants to do what is right for it, is attacked by words spoken on the right and used on the left for bashing. :banghead:

This isn't about 2008 its about NOW and the future for our kids and grandkids. I'll join that fight whoever takes it up.

[H2O Man]

49. I agree.

Whenever someone's "opinion" depends upon others' thinking -- the obvious example being a blog that notes Kerry was not where the blogger approves -- then it simply means the goodness of truth has not taken root in the person with dependent opinion. And that increases the likelihood of projecting the same thought process on others -- in this case, concluding that Kerry's opinion is based on something other than his own beliefs.

[Surya Gayatri]

57. Tell it brother/sister fedup!

You've said more touchingly exactly what I was trying to get across in my OP. I instinctively feel that Kerry, among all of those compromised hacks in DC, still has a shred of integrity and altruistic patriotism. SG

[Totally Committed]

65. "This isn't about 2008 its about NOW and the future...

for our kids and grandkids. I'll join that fight whoever takes it up."

I couldn't agree more. As I have said several times in this thread, already, I am onboard with Kerry's filibuster. I don't have to admire him personally to back this move, because I agree with the line of your post that I just quoted.

I hope this succeeds, truly.

TC

[Totally Committed]

60. First of all, let me say, no one will be happier here

if this filibuster succeeds. And I made the disclaimer I did, not to say I necessarily agree with the blog I posted, only to give a perspective and an honesty to my post. I don't like Kerry, and I don't trust his motives at all, but I do hope it succeeds nonetheless. I felt anyone reading my post should know that up front.

And, may I just say that the beautiful thing about having lived to the age I have and through all the years, the adversities, and the disappointments, is that I don't really give a rat's petoot what anyone thinks of me. I have come to my opinions through knowledge and wisdom of having worked all my life for Democrats and the ideals I thought they held. I don't admire cowardice or dishonesty, no matter where I find it, and I say so. I weep for what this Party has become... I feel duped and I'll say so no matter who thinks I'm wrong.

I am an old lady now, and I'd rather 'die standing than live on my knees', to paraphrase the old addage. I will take no prisoners in my fight to express what I feel is right.

That having been said, I want to reiterate: no one will be happier here if this filibuster succeeds.

TC

[Lexingtonian]

68. I'm always surprised

at the enormous contingent of people who just cannot take anything Kerry does at face value, or as working ahead on the problem from his position inside a structurally unsound Democratic Party apparatus.

He really does evoke a wierd paranoia, political shortsightedness/stupidity, and judgmental classism in people. There's always this assertion of superior insight in the critiques of him. It's the jealousy and anti-snobbist contempt that always seems at the root of it that is always wierdly pathological.

This Ezra Klein moron and his quoted source, for example, don't even contemplate that this filibuster organizing effort could be happening precisely because Kerry and Kennedy don't want Red State Democrats folding on the next classical Right nominee. The election outcome of November 2004 is, in an intelligent view of them, that Republicans are more or less entitled to shift one vote on the Supreme Court their way. Kerry and Kennedy are working things so that the Bush people don't grab for more should John Paul Stevens forcibly retire, so that Republicans have to earn the next seat they want the proper way, from assent of The People, via a win the 2006 Senate elections.

Actually, as I think about it, that's the real problem these critics have. They despise Kerry for doing things within the system, for working to make small d democracy work and sticking within the Democratic apparatus that exists, for not denying and damaging conservative and Republican power outright. For not imposing his will on the other side, and for allowing the other side to do absurd things on the expectation (usually correct) that it will fail or backfire soon enough.

[Surya Gayatri]

82. Lex, I think you summed it up right here...

"They despise Kerry for doing things within the system, for working to make small d democracy work and sticking within the Democratic apparatus that exists, for not denying and damaging conservative and Republican power outright. For not imposing his will on the other side..."

IMHO, this admirable man is truly "Lincolnesque" in his political and personal stature. SG

[sandnsea]

70. He had been working on it

This didn't just start in Switzerland. Kerry was behind a filibuster and some people in his local offices had told callers that before this latest stuff ever came out. He was trying to get Reid to support it before he went around him, the way you're supposed to in the Senate. When it came down to it, he took the matter in his own hands. Nobody would have done anything if it hadn't been for Kerry. The fact that he has gotten so many Senators to support him ought to show the respect he has and where many Democrats really are on Alito.

[WildEyedLiberal]

74. These so-called "bloggers and pundits" are harmful to progressive causes

And if you believe their lies and spin, then you are too.

[Surya Gayatri]

83. Yeah, sometimes you wonder

which side they're really on (besides their own).

While the Progressive Liberal Democratic church is a mega one, embracing a broad ideological spectrum, there are moments when a little more "esprit du corps" wouldn't be amiss. sG

[Kahuna]

39. By stepping forward as a leader. The Dems have to stop being afraid

of failure. People will remember that he took a stand and stood for something. Not that he won or lost.

[Surya Gayatri]

43. I sure hope you're right, Kahuna,

because IMHO, JK has more to lose than to gain by sticking his political neck out like this. SG

[Inuca]

45. Agree

and that's why I am surprised why so many people view his actions as opportunism. As for the Switzerland thing... :wtf: he was not there for the winter sports!!!

[Surya Gayatri]

56. Yeah, but that salient fact was lost

in the noise of the Media Machine. We were supposed to go away with an image of him snowboarding down a slope, his mobile in hand. SG

And WELCOME TO THE DU FAMILY, Inuca. :hi:

[Inuca]

58. I had to smile...

... at the image of snowboarding cell phone in hand calling for a filibuster. Maddening, but funny. And thanks for the welcome :-)

[Vinca]

51. I think that's a true claim - that Kerry's advancing his chances,

but I also think he's acting from the heart, not just being a politician. Big difference there. I know I'm feeling more favorable about him.

[Surya Gayatri]

62. That's what I instinctively feel, Vinca...

Somewhere in that tall, lank frame of his, there's still a grain or two of genuine integrity left, notwithstanding all of his years in the political cesspool of DC. SG

[lynne]

69. I would think it just the opposite. I think that Kerry is taking a HUGE -

- risk that will likely hurt - if not kill - any chance of him ever reaching the Presidency if the filibuster fails.

Should it fail (and, realistically, it is more than possible that it will ultimately fail) Kerry will be forever pinned with the filibuster and its failure and it will be used against him by the press and the repugs. Not a pretty thought - but a valid one.

[Surya Gayatri]

80. That's the way I read it, lynne...

The fight is so unevenly matched & the odds of success so against him, that he must surely be putting principle before politics, at least to a certain degree. SG

[blm]

71. He's not - Dem pundits are killing him, just as he knew they would.

He's sticking his neck out because NO ONE ELSE WOULD stand with Kennedy on a filibuster.

Kerry wasn't even supposed to be in the country - but he came back when no Judiciary Dem would stand up.

He's getting killed by left media and mainstream media and Dem spokespeople are acting like mega-assholes and no one is talking about the SUBSTANCE OF THE DEBATE.

BCCI all over again.

[Surya Gayatri]

84. Yes, who's talking about Alito's unsuitability

in all this media noise? Who's going to the substance of JK's speech before the Senate on Friday? (sound of crickets chirping..........)


SG :shrug: x(

edit: layout

[IndianaGreen]

72. Kerry is obviously ignoring the polls

but he is fighting for our Republic and for that, he gets kudos and support.

Kerry may well become our "stop Hillary" candidate!

[BigYawn]

77. Kerry will get a lot more $$$ by doing a filibuster..so that is good..but

there is no way to stop the repugs from going nuclear
if a successful filibuster is mounted. They need only
51 senators to change the filibuster rule for confirming
judges.

My fear is that once the nuclear option is executed, ALL
FUTURE VACANCIES ON ALL COURTS WILL SAIL THROUGH WITH 51
votes.

So realistically what do we get? We get the base excited,
giving them FALSE HOPE of stopping Alito. More dollars will
pour into Kerry's campaign chest for 2008. He certainly will
benefit. But nothing more.

[saltpoint]

75. The media are a smarmy bunch a lot of the time.

They are not going to give Kerry a break, no matter what. They didn't like Gore either.

If the media held Dubya and his evil administration accountable, I would more readily accept the negative treatment of Senator Kerry. But since they fail in that fundamental responsibility, I think you have got it exactly right: a "truly concerned legislator." Risk or no, Kerry is likely ashamed of the image the world has of our nation as a result of the atrocities of the Bush administration.

[liberalpragmatist]

78. Kerry's in a tough spot - anything he does is spinned one way or the other

I guess if he completely renounced running in '08 people would treat him differently, but he's been quite honest about the fact that he's considering running again.

For Kerry, the media already has the narrative of his being an opportunist, and ANYTHING Kerry does gets spinned that way. It's true that Kerry's probably thought of the politics of this. If you're a major political figure, it doesn't matter who or what: you WILL take into accounts political dynamics because it's part of your job. Some are able to do this more gracefully than others. Others do it while still preserving the perception that they're "principled" (RE: McCain). Unfortunately for Kerry, anything he does is spinned as a result of his presidential race or by his hopes for another shot. He IS the elected junior senator from Massachusetts, so one would expect him to stay visible and significant. Yet ANYTHING he does is spun as his being a "sore loser" or prepping for a no-hope shot in '08. And if he were to sit back and do nothing he would STILL be the focus of ridicule and still be called a "sore loser" for being mopey and unproductive.

Personally, while I like Kerry a lot and have defended him a great deal on this board, I think it's unlikely that he'll have the support for a second nomination. But who knows? I'm just glad he isn't slinking away and I hope that if Kerry's not the 44th President that the next Democratic president, whether it's President Edwards, Warner, Clinton, Bayh, Feingold, Clark, Gore, or Obama, will give him some props and some role - perhaps Secretary of State?

[PBass]

79. Kerry was slammed in 2004 for looking indecisive

Rightly or wrongly a lot of people said "I don't know where he stands". He got hammered for running a campaign that was too careful. He had chances to fight back that he didn't take. Some people said Kerry didn't "inspire" them.

It's all just speculation of course, but maybe Kerry's filibustering because he learned something from his 2004 campaign.

[Surya Gayatri]

85. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't...

This time I feel he's following his instinct for integrity and doing the right thing--consequences be damned (obviously still within a highly charged political context where all decisions have political ramifications, like it or not). SG

[win_in_06]

86. Some say that Kerry's future is tied to the filibuster.

Successful Filibuster = Successful Kerry and vice versa.