Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Killing the King - Sidney Blumenthal on John Kerry

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
reprehensor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:33 PM
Original message
Killing the King - Sidney Blumenthal on John Kerry
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/012304E.shtml

"Kerry is sitting on top of his party, but will he be knocked off when he arrives in New Hampshire?

One year ago the congressional Democratic party gathered to applaud George Bush's state of the union address, a call to arms in Iraq. Having just lost the Senate - its patriotism impugned - the party was disoriented, dispirited and disjointed. It was against that tableau that the feisty former Vermont governor Howard Dean began his ascent as the anti-war, anti-Washington Democrats, and generally anti-Bush candidate. He had this vast unpopulated territory to himself. In Iowa, where congressman Richard Gephardt from Missouri was always the favourite, Dean pulled ahead - as he did nationally. But then his march veered on to a murder-and-suicide scene.

No sitting member of the lower House of Representatives has ever been elected to the presidency. Gephardt's earnest manner, measured flat speech and universally acknowledged decency belied his loudly ticking ambition.

His early distinction came in the aftermath of the 1984 Reagan landslide, when he became the first head of the newly founded Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist group created in reaction to Walter Mondale's dependence on the unions. But in 1988 Gephardt ran for the presidential nomination as the champion of trade protectionism and aggrieved industrial labour, winning the Iowa caucuses. But his candidacy soon collapsed.

In the first year of Bill Clinton's administration, Gephardt rancorously split the Democrats by opposing the North American Free Trade Agreement, and that division contributed to the party losing the Congress in 1994 for the first time in two generations.

Gephardt planned his 2004 campaign as a reprise of Iowa in 1988, but the labour federation as a whole refused to endorse him and he was left with a handful of unions and little else. His last hurrah was a last stand. His message was reduced to the nub of raw protectionism and he devoted himself to tearing down Dean, attacking him as a conservative wolf in liberal sheep's clothing."
-----------------------------------

Is this comment true? "No sitting member of the lower House of Representatives has ever been elected to the presidency."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Indiana Democrat Donating Member (718 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why would you doubt it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsw_81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. No
Representative James Garfield was elected president in 1880. I'm surprised that Blumenthal forgot about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprehensor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thank you.
You should write Mr. Blumenthal a little note.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Was that the "lower" house, though?
What does that mean? The minority party in the House?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dfong63 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. the "upper house" is the senate; the "lower house" is the house of reps
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Yeah...that's what I had thought...but that would make
Edited on Fri Jan-23-04 01:54 PM by BullGooseLoony
the phrasing in the article redundant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Wrong, sort of
I think Blumenthal hedged by saying "sitting member". At the same time Garfield became president, he had just won a Senate seat.

Garfield helped elect Rutherford B. HAYES president, serving on the electoral commission formed to settle the disputed election of 1876. During the Hayes administration he was minority leader of the House. In January 1880 he was elected to the U.S. SENATE.

But Garfield never had a chance to take his Senate seat. In May 1880 he was a delegate to the REPUBLICAN National Convention. A well-known party leader for whom a presidential movement was already afoot, he attracted much favorable attention. Garfield placed John Sherman's name in nomination for president. After 34 ballots had failed to nominate Ulysses S. GRANT, James G. Blaine, or Sherman, the supporters of Blaine and Sherman united on Garfield, who won on the 36th ballot.



http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/bios/20pgarf.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting to blame the NAFTA split for the Dem loss of the House
Interesting too that Clinton had shown the support behind him after the govt. shut down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. In the Clinton Wars, he more generally blames Gephardt for criticizing
Clinton incessantly. He says Gephardts attacks from the left were a big reason we lost the House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Well.... why couldn't he work with Clinton on an "agenda"
I see now why Clinton couldn't get anything done in those 2 short years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. Lincoln's last job in gov was House of Rep prior to being Pres, however...
...he had been out of office for a few years, and lost a senate race in between.

He was a lawyer and was barnstorming the nation with anti-slavery speeches, which is how he made his name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaneQPublic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. Very few sitting senators have been elected, as well
Kennedy and Harding are the only ones I can think of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC