Kerry on Late Edition tomorrow

[ProSense]

CNN’s “Late Edition’’ is also chock-full of guests, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and John Kerry of Massachusetts, Hoshvar Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister as well as General Richard Myers, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
link

[wisteria]

1. Thank you! I was going to check later on the Sunday shows. Nice surprise. n/t

[MBS]

2. the other talking-head shows. . .

It's Iraq Sunday:

Face the Nation: Obama and McCain, on Iraq
Meet the Press: Iraq discussion with Dodd, Lieberman, Kyl, Hagel; also Stephen Hadley
Fox News SUnday: Cheney (gosh, they need a Darth Vader smilie on that table. .nothing there is close to adequate)
Stephanopoulos: Murtha, Hadley on Iraq, and Schwarzenegger on himself

[wisteria]

4. it will be interesting to see who gets more press from Face the Nation, McCain or Obama.

Actually, Obama might be outgunned in this arena. But, it might be interesting to see how it comes out as a warm up to possible debates. I won't watch it if it interferes with Kerry though. He has more knowledge and expertise on Iraq and the Middle East than both of the others, together.

[Inuca]

14. I watched, and

I was hoping it will be a head-to-head discussion. It was not. First McCain, them Obama. In my view, in terms of arguing his point of view (which of course I do not agree with), McCain was better, which again speaks to Obama's lack of experience and reluctance to take a clear, well-defined, practical stance. Compare this with JK's answer to Blitzer (senator McCain is wrong, and here are the reasons why) when asked about McCain's position.

[wisteria]

29. Thanks for the summary. I didn't have time to watch.

I too, though Kerry answered the McCain very well.

[rox63]

3. Thanks for the talking heads-up :)

:hi:

[wisteria]

5. Did you post this on DU-G n/t

[ProSense]

6. Done

Posted in GD.

[globalvillage]

7. Late edition starting now. n/t

[Island Blue]

8. Kerry up next. n/t

[sandrakae]

9. I just watched it. He was awsome as usual.

[wisteria]

10. He was great!!! Total control of the interview and the conversation.

Wow. I won't get into his what I think is his one year from now comment about turning over Iraq to the Iraq's. I haven't heard this before today.

[karynnj]

11. I don't think it is new, but a re-affirmation of Kerry/Feingold

The things he proposed doing leading to the deadline take time - and they haven't been started. The 1 year period is from when enacted and includes the regional conference.

I know this may allow people to get to (anti-war) side of him, but they would be doing what Kerry says no one is doing - ignoring the dangers of the regional cris there. Doing that will play well on DU.

[Mass]

16. The comment is not new. This has been his plan for more than two years now.

The only thing he changed is that he does not give a date because he has to change the date every few months, when it becomes obsolete.

BTW, we cannot say anymore that Feingold and Kerry have the same proposal. Feingold is advocating six months. I'd wished that Kerry had stayed there, given that these dates are purely symbolic, as Bush is not going to do that anyway.

This said, I washed every talking show this morning and Kerry was the most compelling. The only other one who was compelling was Hagel rebuffing Lieberman, but I liked the way Kerry went after McCain too.

[beachmom]

17. On Feingold and funding:

I watched him on KO, and here are some of my thoughts:

1. I thought he had an interesting idea about setting up a timetable for when funding would be cut off. Basically, the Congress would tell the Bush Admin. when combat troops would come out and only cut off funding then. That gives them lead time. I think that's an idea to consider if things get steadily worse (which they will)

2. What I didn't like was Feingold throwing the Iraq plan hot potato back at Bush. I think Congress should do the plan as well as the deadline. This is where Feingold fails as a leader. You can't just tell Bush you're cutting off funding and when. You have to give him a whole plan. This way, nobody could accuse the Dems of having no plan or being irresponsible.


I'm glad Feingold has come out with this position. He's a bit early with it, and I can't support it right now, but it may have to come to this, so it's good that it's out there.

[beachmom]

18. "One year" -- that's the blueprint for the next Kerry/Feingold plan

Its time will come, I am confident:

Plan will call for all combat troops to be redeployed out of Iraq (or to Kuwait, "in the desert", maybe even Kurdistan if that's doable) in one year. After that, all funding is cut. If Bush refuses, then it is he who is not protecting the troops, since he was put on notice.

Plan should include that an international conference be commenced as Kerry has described it before which was also in the Iraq Study Group plan.

Plan should talk about the Iraqi government being put on notice that they will have to take over security in one year.


The time is not right yet for this, but given how Bush is behaving, it will come to this, and I think Kerry and Feingold will work together again. But as Kerry said on the Ed Schultz program, this thing is going to work in steps. 1) Non-binding resolution, 2) Cut troops surge funding 3) We'll see . . .

What I see is Kerry/Feingold Part 2.

[karynnj]

19. Even if Feingold doesn't, there might be a possibility

of Kerry/Warner, Kerry/Hagel or Kerry/Lugar. Warner was honest and kind enough to say positive things about the plan and his his biggest negative was hat "timing is everything". Hagel actually sounded like Kerry, both in the Senate and on MTP. Lugar clearly has a lot of respect for Kerry. (I would bet that the Kerry summit idea would not have been included unless Warner pushed it and these 2 agreed.) This would be great as Kerry would be part of the bipartisan plan.

Feingold seems to have moved more to getting out faster and giving up on the diplomacy. Most other Democrats are unlikely to work with Kerry as the leadership clearly doesn't want to give him any oxygen.

[Mass]

20. Neither Lugar nor Warner favor a deadline. They may be a Lugar-Levin

or a Warner-Levin, but, except with a real change from their part, not a Lugar or Warner/Kerry.

I am not sure where Hagel stands, but I do not think he favours a deadline either.

IMHO, there is more chance of a Feingold/kerry again, though they may have to agree on a date of withdrawal. It was obvious this morning that Kerry did NOT support Levin fully.

I am not sure that Feingold and Kerry are that far apart. Feingold does not prohibit diplomacy. He wants the emphasis on getting the troops out. With Kerry, he is the only one who is putting the emphasis on Afghanistan and the Middle East, and not only Iraq.

[karynnj]

25. I was just going by the fact that Warner

did say that it was the wrong time. Even before the surge talk, Warner seemed to be moving away from Bush. He has never said he is for a deadline - the conjecture was that at some point, I wonder if he would be.

I see what you mean with Feingold - it had seemed to me that most of the diplomatic/strategic pieces of Kerry/Feingold were Kerry.

[TayTay]

26. Remember, in June of 2006, Feingold wanted to shelve the timetable

Kerry did not. Feingold was all for dropping the timbetable in the Dem Caucus. It was Kerry who stuck to his guns and didn't even initially want to change the date to begin withdrawal from Dec of 06 to July of 07. (Feingold did NOT fight for that. He caved first.)

[ProSense]

27. That's right.

Remembering the opposition then and listening to the calls to leave now, makes me wonder what happened to the wait-and-see claims. The situation has gotten worse.

It's approaching a year since Kerry introduced his plan, seven months since it was voted on.

[TayTay]

28. Kerry has not changed his opinion since then.

The Dem caucus forced him to agree to bring the timetable out to a year, but he would not backdown on putting in the proposal. (Reid, remember, did not want this to come up at all. It embarassed Reid and Clinton and others to have the Kerry/Feingold measure in there at all.)

[globalvillage]

21. Do you think Kerry and Hagel could agree on a plan?

I do, and I think it would be the most likely to receive bipartisan support.
Two vets, one Dem and one Repub will have a lot of credibility on this. I can see them working together, especially given Hagel's testimony the other day.

[Mass]

22. It is difficult to know at this point.

It is clear that Hagel had enough of all that, but he has had enough for a while now and has never broken party line in a vote on Iraq. Would he have the courage to do that.

Also, I have never heard him offer a solution. He seems to be one of those who criticize a lot, but offer little. From this, it is very difficult to know where he stands with a withdrawal of Iraq. Does it favor a phased withdrawal, giving Iraqis a deadline, living as soon as possible?

[globalvillage]

23. I'd like to see it.

Hagel seems completely fed up with the administration's Iraq policy. From what he had to say at the SFRC hearing when he questioned Condi, sounds like he's talking to his fellow vets on the committee about the govt dishonesty during Vietnam and relating it to today.
Maybe he's just blowing smoke, but I think he wants to see a real plan to get out. I can only hope that would include the provisions of Sen Kerry's proposal.

[YvonneCa]

12. Great Interview...

...on Late Edition. Here's my LTTE to Wolf:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Thank you for having Senator John Kerry on your show this morning to talk about Iraq. It was wonderful to hear a 'voice of reason' in a world that seems to have gone a bit insane.

I was glad that the Senator had the opportunity to talk about the (supposedly non-existent) Democratic plan for Iraq a bit (though not enough). He clearly spelled out the importance of a 'Dayton-like' conference to leverage the political outcome in Iraq...something that Kerry has called for for years, and that the Iraq Study Group also called for...that this administration refuses to do. I actually don't think Bush has the clout or credibility to pull it off anymore.

I was also glad that Senator Kerry talked about the use of fear and 'straw man' arguments used by this administration to help it sell and implement unpopular policy. The best Iraq example is saying that all Democrats want to withdraw immediately and that this would be a dangerous thing to do. Very few Democrats say that...and Kerry never has said it. And to think we Democrats don't understand the consequences for success or failure in Iraq or the larger Middle East is an insult.

Finally, I think Bush was an inflammatory figure and lacked credibilty from the day he became president, just because his name is Bush. His actions during the last six years have only made that worse. The real solution to the Iraq situation, the Middle East conflict, and the REAL war on Al Qaida is that we need new leadership in the United States. We need a new president and vice-president.

And we shouldn't really wait two years or drag the country through another impeachment process to accomplish that. It's time for the country and the future of our children to come first...Bush and Cheney need to resign...NOW.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Excellent job, Senator! I know no one is calling for resignation...but I think it's time. :patriot:

[beachmom]

13. Great letter!

I taped the program but haven't had a chance to watch it yet. Sounds like he did a great job.

[YvonneCa]

24. Thank you...

...and he did do a great job...as usual. :)

[ginnyinWI]

15. Good interview

Blitzer kept quiet and let the Senator make his very good points. I wish all Americans knew about Straw Man arguments and how often * and Cheney use them--and they are out in full force now. Twisting the Dems' plan into something it's not, then using fear to scare people.

JK showed some fire today, which is a good thing in measured amounts on these shows. People need to know how strongly those of us who opppose * really feel! This is not some sematic exercise--people are dying every day. Of course he used intellectual arguments primarily, which is the best way--but I also liked the fire. :)