Obama Should Send Out Kerry to Stop The Clinton Swiftboating And Get Back on Track

[DrFunkenstein]

I was one of the people who said give the Kerry campaign some time to respond to the Swiftboats, only to have days and days pass in silence. The Obama campaign is making a longterm mistake using the candidate to do the dirty work of touching anything the Clintons say.

Obama has a perfect media gift in Kerry. The media are sucker for good fight narratives, and pitting John Kerry against Bill Clinton would be a nice match up. Especially because Kerry was the actual target of Swiftboating (i.e. - the guy who had actually been in a swiftboat).

Obama's whole rationale is about his embodiment as an inspirational figure. The Clintons know that they can weather miles of trash talk because no one expects any better of them and they can rely on their dynastic establishment connections to pull them through.

Not only will Obama lose if he continues down this road, he will ultimately lose the energy he needs for the general election. He is by far the better candidate, and he needs to establish a proper surrogate to get back to the job of being that transformative person.

I'm not saying to turn the other cheek, I'm saying get someone to do the return smack for you. Lord knows the Clintons have racked up some of the nastiest lies and dirty politics in Democratic history, but Obama can't take it personally. He needs someone to take it personally for him.

I think John Kerry is the perfect man for the job, but somebody needs to do it. Now.

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Yep ... Clinton is evil, Obama is without sin

Repeat until it's The Conventional Wisdom.

--p!

[Windy]

5. John Kerry has more class and more honor and love of country than Bill C.! I agree with the OP.

of course, Bill, Penn and Wolfson would "swiftboat" him too! Anything to win!!!

[mondo joe]

13. Yes, that was one classy concession speech. NT

[Inuca]

17. Yes, it WAS n/t

[Dogmudgeon]

51. "Anything to win"

Apply directly to the brain. Apply directly to the brain. Apply directly to the brain.

Repeat until it's the Conventional Wisdom.

--p!

[sunonmars]

2. hahah send Kerry out to confront the swiftboaters

Oh yeah, the guy who couldnt handle them in 2004, that'll work.

[Windy]

4. So you admit that you're candidate is "swiftboating"? Glad to see it. n/t

[karynnj]

55. Re-read the OP which makes the case that the nominee shouldn't be the one responding the loudest

In 2004, Kerry provided both the media and the party with more than ample proof that the SBVT were liars. They had the official record in the form of the Naval records, the Brinkley book, the accounts of all the men in Kerry's boat when he got these awards and the Nixon tapes showing they investigated him for dirt in 1971 and found none - two years after the fact.

If Kerry had someone doing what Kerry himself is doing now, it would have helped. Why didn't McAuliffe lead an outcry in August on this with all the material available. That would have been far more productive than his free lance attack on Bush's record, which the public did not care about - from polls asking people favoring Bush or leaning to Bush. Imagine if McAuliffe, as head of the DNC, had pushed every prominent Democrat to issue a statement decrying the purple heart bandaids. It is very likely that had they done this on the first night of the convention when they first appeared, that would have embarrassed the media into saying it was a step too far. The fact that the media mostly treated it as a novelty, like a funny campaign hat, sent a signal that they thought Kerry's service merited this type of attack. Nice way to reward a man for honorable service in a war he was fundamentally against.

In 2004, as the OP says, Kerry thought the truth, especially well documented truth would suffice. In the past it probably would have. Bill Clinton never produced a fraction of this to refute any charge against him - the difference is that every Democrat came to his defense in the 1992 general election. Cleland, Clark and Dean and a very few others did in 2004.

The saddest thing is that in Kerry, the Democrats had a candidate who was extremely easy to defend. I assume it was harder in 1992 for the honorable Kerry to defend Clinton after the series of half truths he told on the draft, especially after the famous letter came out - but he did. He also did it without compromising his own integrity. In Kerry, they had a candidate who was never caught in lies and who was among the cleanest politicians in office.

[sam sarrha]

3. you need to inform us of the "Details" of said 'Swift Boating', the specifics, or Links, or

[DrFunkenstein]

14. On The Drug Dealing, Madrassa Partying, Reaganite Fairytale?

I wouldn't even know where to begin. Did I mention that Obama's middle name is Hussein? Or that he is not pro-choice? Or that he thinks conservatives have all the good ideas?

Hillary Clinton has had every opportunity to present the case for her candidacy with decency and civility, based upon her own qualifications. Instead, the Clintons lie with such ease that it's disturbing.

[Inuca]

20. "the Clintons lie with such ease "

Lately, this quote keeps popping up in my mind over and over and over and over again.

[Laurab]

67. It's actually a quote by David Geffen

He was, at one time, a huge Clinton supporter and friend, and is in a position to know. He's donated the max to Edwards, Obama, and Chris Dodd. The exact quote is: "“Everybody in politics lies, but the Clintons do it with such ease, it’s troubling.”

Here's one article - it's from 2007, but it's pretty interesting, and includes the Geffen quote:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2MyYjE0MjRhYzU3YTA1Y2E3YmQzNDRkZjFmN2M0ZGY=



Edited for typo

[sam sarrha]

25. can you link to hillery, or just troll types of the like here.. I think this is the subject..>Link>>

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&resnum=0&q=tony+rezko+obama&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=news_result&resnum=1&ct=title

your examples are more related to Fox news and the media Wing of the ReThugs

[karynnj]

60. I wish they were Fox News only

The problem I have is that they are things that people high in the campaign have done - repeatedly. You can also add the distortions on Obama's record - like the NH debate use of the Patriot Act. Obama, like Kerry, said that the Patriot ACt contained many awful provisions. Many were fixed in 2005/2006. The choice in 2006 was never between no Patriot Act and the new one, but between the new one and extending the worse old one. HRC also ignored that she voted the same way - and I bet if we searched she criticized the old Patriot Act in 2004/2005 again.

Like with "funding the war", she ignores she did the same thing.

Another Clinton falsehood was that Obama was "like Bush" on what to do going forward on Iraq. He wasn't, but just as the Republicans untruthfully accused Kerry of this in 2004, Bill Clinton twisted an Obama statement to say that recently. Here is a comment that explains what Obama said.

"Hillary said last night that Obama "said he agreed with Bush on the war in Iraq." Here are the actual facts: From the Chicago Tribune, July 27, 2004- Obama, a state senator from Chicago's Hyde Park neighborhood, opposed the Iraq invasion before the war. But he now believes U.S. forces must remain to stabilize the war-ravaged nation--a policy not dissimilar to the current approach of the Bush administration. The problem, Obama said, is the low regard for Bush in the international community. "How do you stabilize a country that is made up of three different religious and in some cases ethnic groups, with minimal loss of life and minimum burden to the taxpayers?" Obama said. "I am skeptical that the Bush administration, given baggage from the past three years, not just on Iraq. . . . I don't see them having the credibility to be able to execute. I mean, you have to have a new administration to execute what the Bush administration acknowledges has to happen." Now how does that translate to Obama agreeing with Bush on the war?"

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/From_John_Kerry_Re_Swiftboating.html#comments

This actually sounds like Kerry in 2004 - and the media recognized in the Iraq Study Group's recommendations much of what Kerry proposed in 2004 and 2005 - things like having a regional summit that has not occured to this day.

[sam sarrha]

37. no.. that crap isnt Swiftboating, that is Reich Wing Media..spin, I thought you meant this, >Link

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&resnum=0&q=tony+rezko+obama&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=news_result&resnum=1&ct=title

swift boating is not distorting or spinning, it is getting paid for lying to destroy the good reputation of your leader, whose action got you a bronze star for heroism in the same battle just for following the real hero.
stabbing a guy in the back that turned to engage the enemy before you did, and calling him a coward.

here you are whining about Shit Fox news does to get more stupid people to watch their stupid media theater..

the Tony Rezko story might just innocently resemble the Randy Duke Cunningham,now in prison/Abramoff,..where is he? ..situation. maybe he got played..if so, who wants a sucker for president?

[rug]

6. In a battle of surrogates, Bill would leave Kerry as a grease stain on the pavement.

[Fabio]

16. really?

i dont think so. I think the ex-president lacks moral authority - i think john kerry, flawed in many ways, has that moral authority.

[MBS]

27. yup, Kerry is the guy with the moral authority n/t

[beachmom]

31. Exactly. Bill has his charismatic talents, but this kind of battle

is stacked in Kerry's favor.

I am not sure he would do what DrFunkenstein asks, however. He's sticking to the right wing, thus far:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/01/24/swift_boated_once_kerry_now_helms_democrats_armada/

[Fabio]

33. good article.

I think Kerry seems awfully self aware that mistakes were made in hindsite. I hope people like him are all out there battling the right wingers and the media during the GE for nominee.

[DrFunkenstein]

34. Perhaps Kerry Knows He'll Be Seeing Hillary in the Senate For Many Years

And doesn't want to stir bad blood. My larger point was about finding a high profile surrogate, certainly not dragging Kerry's name into a shouting match.

[Fabio]

36. Frankly, DrF

I think you'll see Ted Kennedy and then Al Gore endorse Barack Obama before super tuesday. Just a hunch...

[beachmom]

38. I agree with you on surrogates. I think that is what Kerry needed in

the summer of '04, and was lacking. But the Dem primaries are tough, because everyone has to work together after they're over. As it is, Kerry is out on a limb supporting Obama in a positive way. I think it's pushing it to ask him to go full out negative on the Clintons. It seems the media wants that, since they misinterpreted his e-mail as an attack on the Clintons, when I found nothing in there except against the right wing e-mail smears against Obama.

[Fabio]

40. The media and the right wing certainly would like to see

such a conflict.

[beachmom]

49. Well, it makes a good story, I guess. Of course, you can't deny

that some of our own are adding to the flames, but I guess that just means how close this primary fight is.

[Inuca]

42. I hope he will :-) n/t

[GalleryGod]

75. Kerry and Clintons ? Oil & Water

However...I truly doubt the "Clinton Dynasty" would be here without the generous help (19%) of old, Ross Perot.:patriot: :rofl: :patriot:

[rug]

77. Moral authority is a disdavantage in a street fight.

[karynnj]

61. I doubt it

Compare Kerry on This Week to Bill Clinton anywhere. Clinton gets angry, turns red and wags his finger at people when he disagrees. That is not likely to win converts. Kerry was pleasant, in command of the facts and in charge. I don't see any accounts of Senators Kennedy or Daschle or Congressman Emanuel telling Senator Kerry to behave as they have done to Clinton. No matter what else anyone has ever said of Kerry, they agree that he has integrity and is a gentleman.

Did you, by chance, notice how many pundits picked up the way Kerry framed the difference between the candidates in his endorsement? Many have done so without attribution, but that is actually for the best.

[rug]

78. I didn't notice the comments on the endorsement.

I do think though that Clinton's emotional advocacy plays a lot better than Kerry's patrician detachment.

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. Like the way it worked in 2004?

Please.............

[jasmine621]

8. Kerry couldn't or wouldn't even stop the swiftboating against himself.

How is this going to help Obama. Remember the unkind things that were said about his wife? At least Bill Clinton will take up for HC. They fighters. And that is what the Dems need right now. A fighter with experience and battle-hardened by the MSM and the Republicans.

[Inuca]

22. Kerry admited that he should have done more

And he learns from his mistakes. He has done more in defending OTHERS (a concept totally alien to the Clintons) ever since.

[sunonmars]

70. bit fucking late to whinge about swiftboating now is it not Kerry.

[pampango]

9. Whether you consider it "swiftboating" or not, that is a good idea.

Obama should not respond to Bill, himself. If he spends his time responding to both Bill and Hillary, he sounds too defensive. Respond to Hillary and let Kerry respond to Bill.

[ccpup]

10. too late

while Barack and his campaign have been furiously stomping on the spark in the wet grass that is Bill Clinton, they've made an unfortunate calculation and completely ignored the raging forest fire racing up the field of dry hay behind them which is Tony Rezko.

With major pieces in the LA Times and the NY Times -- and carried in other markets as well, I suspect -- detailing his sometimes confusing history with, disproved statements about, "boneheaded" decisions with and regrettable support of and longtime friendship with a man now facing multiple Federal Indictments, I doubt Bill Clinton is their biggest problem going into Super Tuesday.

Not even mild-mannered John Kerry with a pail full of water and a fireman's cap is going to be able to save the day.

[DrFunkenstein]

18. He Simply Has to Point Out That No One Says He Did Anything Wrong

What is so difficult about that. Many of us have had friends that turned out to be bad apples, and it is difficult to cut them loose because you've been friends for a long time. But Obama did nothing wrong. He has never been a drug dealer and he's never done anything with Rezco that is unethical. He conceded that it was "boneheaded" because it could create the appearance of something wrong and he wants to hold himself to a very high standard.

Maybe we should talk about the massive donations by the Marc Rich family to the Clinton library, which serves as a limitless source of favor peddling. Oh, but Hillary doesn't want to disclose anything involving the experience she is touting?

[ccpup]

28. he wrote letters as a State Legislator

in a successful attempt to land tax-payer funded contracts (worth $43 million) for Rezko and a man named Marhu to build low income housing despite the fact they had no construction experience. Within five years, the buildings -- which sat in Barack's district -- were run down, being sued by the City for being slums and, for five weeks during one of Chicago's coldest winters, went without heat. Barack did nothing. At the time Rezko and Mahru were claiming they were broke and couldn't afford to heat the buildings, they were still donating hand-over-fist to Barack's campaign.

Now, one can't fault him for the mistakes of a friend. I suspect that unfortunately there are many buildings in need of repair in Chicago and one can't be expected to do or be aware of everything.

But Barack compounded the problem by first saying he did no favors for Rezko, but changed his story when the letters were discovered. He then claimed he never knew Mahru, until it was discovered he had hired his son as an intern in his office. But the coup de grace for Barack came when he claimed he had only accepted "$50,000 to $60,000" in campaign contributions when it was discovered he had actually accepted more than $168,000. Add to that his statement on the real estate deal (a "mistake" and "boneheaded decision") and a potentially simple matter becomes unnecessarily complicated.

Although Patrick Fitzgerald hasn't made any statement about Barack's involvement in the Indictment (he is listed as "political candidate" in the documents, though), I trust he wasn't involved in Rezko's dirty dealings. Unfortunately, his easily disproved statements muddy up the matter enough for people to be suspicious.

[Inuca]

24. And yet another example

AFAIK ther is no proof any wrongdoing from Obama's part in the whole Rezko thing. It may change, I have no way of knowing. But for the time being, it is nothing but guilt by association, and a teritory that the Clintons may want to be careful about treading into. The ace up their sleeves though is that they assume, often correctly, that others will not be willing to play at the same level they are willing to stoop to.

[ccpup]

35. well, yes and no

you're right that -- despite Patrick Fitzgerald's refusal to make a statement one way or the other (Barack is listed as "political candidate" in the documents, though) -- there doesn't appear to be evidence as of yet of any wrongdoing on Barack's part.

But as I said in a recent Post, he has unnecessarily muddied the waters by making easily disproved statements about favors done for Rezko, money accepted from Rezko and who he did or did not know. What could have been a simple matter of an associate who unfortunately made some real bad, bad decisions has become slightly more complicated by Barack's creative and selective recollections.

[mtnsnake]

11. What a wonderful idea, since Kerry was so effective against the REAL swiftboaters last time

[Fabio]

23. Did you really read the original post?

There is an entire subtext to it that you and others responding are missing. As DrFunk is suggesting -- it's never really a good thing to have to defend yourself in front of the public. Character witnesses and proxies work. Many of us who cheered for the Kerry Campaign were shocked not to see the candidate respond more forcefully, but honestly,who knows if that would have worked? It's becomes a game of he said/she said. As it happened, his fellow crewman, who were out there telling the truth -- were not high profile/smooth enough for the media. It's a role Edwards probably should have taken on IMHO - but someone like Clark or Webb (as vp noms) would have been better equipped.

Regardless, I think John Kerry is out there trying very hard to protect Barack Obama, but I think he is being very, very diligent about not attacking others - despite what you read around here. I think he should stay that course.

[mtnsnake]

39. Yeah I read it. The OP suggests Kerry should "stop the Clinton swiftboating". What did I miss?

I suggested that's just a wonderful idea, considering how effective Kerry was in 2004 with he didn't hesitate to respond to the REAL swiftboaters back then :eyes:

Was it because I left the eyes off my other post you didn't get it?

[Fabio]

58. Ummh, did you read my previous post?

not just the subject header. i think you are missing the point of DrF's post -- which really isnt John Kerry specific - he's using him as an example.

[mondo joe]

12. That would be awesome. Given Kerry's spineless defense of himself, there is no one

I'd rather see be point person on this.

[GalleryGod]

19. ...here's some jewelry you're unfamiliar with

That would be the Silver Star,Mondo.

[mondo joe]

29. Nice jewelry. Too bad the campaign didn't merit it. NT

[Fabio]

30. Huh?

Technically it did.

[karynnj]

63. Sorry, you don't get that from political campaigns

Senator Warner, Republican chair of the Armed Service Committee and in the Secretary of the Navy's office during the Vietnam War, said in a Senate debate that Kerry's medal was well deserved and that he had signed off on it in then.

I guess you prefer the SBVT?

[GalleryGod]

74. That's OK, Sen. Kerry & I don't mind we took up the slack for probably your Dad and of, course

Slick Willie from Hope...we signed a contract, did our duty, and came home. Just hope you can contribute as much to this country as John F. Kerry.

[GalleryGod]

15. A Patriot

[rodeodance]

21. Anything in particular you would like Kerry to hit Bill with?--since your are vague, like Omaha-

just thought I would ask.

....the Clintons have racked up some of the nastiest lies and dirty politics in Democratic history, but Obama can't take it personally. He needs someone to take it personally for him

[DrFunkenstein]

26. You Can Start With The Lies About Voter Suppression in Nevada

That's before you get to the small stuff like saying Obama thinks that conservatives have had all the good ideas. Since both of the Clintons got it so spectacularly right with their vocal support for the Iraq invasion, perhaps they might have been able to figure out that was not what Obama said in the least. And to suggest that it was means they are either incredibly stupid or think the American people are.

[rodeodance]

52. I think Kerry should wait until the chinton campaign puts out their list.

[MNDemNY]

32. Yes, Kerry's fine oratory skills will surely be an asset.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[beachmom]

41. Ah, it behooves Dems not to believe the false hype invented by the media.

I think people forget how easily Kerry won in the primaries. Someone with a lack of oratory skill would not do that. And he out-debates everyone in the entire 2008 campaign on both sides of the aisle.

[MNDemNY]

43. But that big red "L" on his forehead is so glaring.

[Inuca]

45. Liberal? n/t

[MNDemNY]

53. Slightly to the right of Karl Marx...Thank you.

[beachmom]

47. Nice 3rd grade discussion.

[MNDemNY]

57. 5th grade...at least.

(had to dumb it down for the likes of obamanation,)

[mondo joe]

48. My recollection of the 2004 primary season is rather different.

My recollection was that during the Dean ascent Kerry was present but less than impressive. When some voters decided they needed the SAFE bet they went for Kerry.

But I know in my area (which I recognize is purely anecdotal and therefore not statistically meaningful) there was a big "plug your nose and vote" factor. At my caucus it was all about Dean, Edwards and Kucinich.

Full disclosure: I was a very serious Deaniac.

[beachmom]

50. Well, Kerry can be uneven sometimes, but I think when he's on --

he's on. My favorite speech he has ever given, however, was in 2006 -- "Dissent". It rivals the best orators in our party; it's only that Kerry isn't always consistent in speechmaking -- I will definitely allow that.

Don't forget in Iowa when Rassman showed up. That was an authentic moment and showed Kerry was the real deal. I know you're probably disappointed still that Dean lost, but at least he lost in part to a genuine moment.

[mondo joe]

54. I have two aproaches to the campaigns:

1. My personal hopes - sure, I think we chose a weaker candidate.

2. A more removed position - the party made its choice, let's move on.

So I'm okay with supporting the party choice and not lingering on what I wish we'd done.

All that said, I still think Kerry is unimpressive as a fighter, and I think he'd be a poor choice to defend Obama. If I were the candidate, I sure wouldn't send the guy who lost the last election out to defend me.

So the more removed position says, I think Kerry would be a poor choice for that role. The personal HRC supporter in me thinks it would be great. ;-)

[karynnj]

65. Obviously other caucuses disagreed as Kerry won WA

It actually shows that the media turn from labeling both Dean and Kerry anti-war through at least April/May 2003 to saying that only Dean was anti-war (ignoring less likely candidates) by summer worked on you. Calling for regime change at home when the war was approved by 70% of the country in April 2003 was ignored. (Kerry was hurt by missing the 2003 TBA DNC event due to cancer surgery. Dean gave a great speech there.)

I think if you looked at their real records, Kerry's history is more liberal and his fight against government and corporate corruption more long term and substantial than Dean or Edwards.

[mondo joe]

68. Yes, and lost the General Election. Against George Bush.

And though I agree that Kerry is more liberal than Dean, I found him a woefully inadequate fighter.

[beachmom]

72. If Dean was such a great fighter and could have won the G.E., he

would have won in the primaries. Sorry, but that is how it works.

[mondo joe]

73. Mostly, I agree.

:-)

[BigDDem]

44. Kerry?? Stop swiftboating????

How ironic! :rofl:

[Inuca]

46. How befitting!!!! n/t

[Tellurian]

56. Kerry is too smart to get into an argument he can't Win..

[smoogatz]

59. If Kerry was no match for Karl Rove,

what makes you think he can take on the Clintons? Rove wasn't just studying Atwater's playbook, you know.

[Inuca]

62. Are you are implying that

the Clintons are "better" at this than Rove?

[smoogatz]

66. Not better, no, but Rove synthesized their approach

to national electoral politicis with Atwater's, and managed to get his obviously inferior candidate into office. Twice. Kerry's no surrogate attack dog; you're going to put him up against Bill freaking Clinton, the man with the toughest hide on the planet?

[bidenista]

64. he's running against two people

This is Obama's HUGE problem, and it's one no other candidate has ever faced. He has an ex-prez and his wife running against him. You could hear the frustration when he referred to Bill's role in the last debate, and the comment about how "sometimes I don't know who I'm running against".

What Obama needs to do is exactly what you say. He needs to get himself a "Bill", to fight Bill. Kerry might be good, but I do wonder: if he couldn't fight for himself against a Repub, how likely is he to be effective for another against a fellow Dem? He should also start highlighting the fact that the Clintons are behaving like the Macbeths.

[BenDavid]

69. Kerry fighting back? Help me L-rd....But kerry will not because

he owes Bill Clinton....how does kerry owe Bill? if it were not for bill we all could have gone to bed by 10 on election night 04 when the results for Pa. came in and bush wins Pa. but a funny thing happened...when kerry's ass was in trouble in pa. and bush was ahead by a couple or even with kerry just who did kerry call? He sure as hell did not call obama...uh huh he called on Bill Clinton and Clinton responded and said yes and came to Philadephia pa. on oct 25th before a crowd of 50 plus thousand and endorsed kerry and this was Bill's first appearance after heart surgery....The following week Kerry took Pa......so if kerry wants to have any friends left I would say he would not.....but then again kerry is a stupid ass who in 04 did not listen to JOHN EDWArds WHEN EDWARDS TOLD KERRY TO GO AFTER THOSE SWIFT BOAT FOLKS AND KERRY SAID no....AND WE SEE HOW KERRY PAID BACK john...UH HUH SUPPORTED OBAMA...

oh hell yeah get kerry out there to fight for ya....:rofl:

[ieoeja]

71. He does owe her payback for 2006.

When she joined the GOP ranting against Kerry for making fun of Bush.

Too bad the DNC Chairman has to remain neutral. Because he owes her much more payback as she spent considerable time in 2005 and 2006 helping the GOP paint the Democratic party as out of touch.

For anyone wondering when I decided I would never vote for Hillary. I had my doubts about her prior to 2005. But the stab in the back at Kerry sealed the deal irrevocably. I was no big Kerry fan, but he was a Democrat and her lying attack on him stunned me. In fact, I am rather surprised to see she gets so much Democratic support this year.

[GalleryGod]

76. John's tough enough-just ask his crew. He just refuses to stoop to the level of

Arkansas Scorched Earth....
I thnk I'll Re-read "The Hunting of the President" tonight.

:yoiks: with a "fresh" pair of eyes :yoiks:

[Tellurian]

79. Hillary said 4 words.."I think it's inappropriate"

when asked by a reporter: "what do you think of Kerry's botched joke?"

http://politicalhumor.about.com/b/2006/11/02/john-kerrys-botched-joke.htm