John Kerry Says President Obama Isn't 'Caving'

[bigtree]

from Meet the Press, December 05, 2010: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40493580/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/


MR. GREGORY: . . . you know, a lot of viewers will look at this, especially liberals, Senator...

SEN. KERRY: Yeah.

MR. GREGORY: ...and they'll say, "Absolutely right. Senator Kerry's got it exactly right. Then why is the president caving to the Republicans?"

SEN. KERRY: He's not . . . let me tell you what the president is fighting for, and appropriately. And, and first of all, the president's not caving. The president insisted that we have the votes that we had yesterday so that America could see what the Republicans are fighting for, and they could see what we're fighting for. His preferred position is $250,000. Give every American a tax cut up to say, $250,000, but don't, don't put money back into the pockets of people who may never invest it in the United States. I mean, if you're earning more than $1 million a year, you--you're--that investment, when, when you give that tax cut, you get about a 30 cent return on the dollar given. If you give unemployment insurance, you get $1.60 back on the dollar that you put in. There are multiplier effects that are a reality of our economic laws. The Republicans are ignoring them...

MR. GREGORY: Would you not agree that politically the, the problem for the president has been he has done nothing to make the Republicans uncomfortable.

SEN. KERRY: Just a minute, David. Let me, let me take you on, on that. The president of the United States came into office with a president who'd left him with a $5 trillion add-on to the debt of this country, an unprecedented financial crisis. The fact is that the TARP that we passed that everybody hates--they hate the word, they hate the concept--it saved, it saved countless numbers of jobs in this country. The Recovery Act saved millions of jobs in this country and brought our financial system back from the brink. Wall Street ought to be singing this president's praises. We've had a 60 percent increase in the stock market in two years. How often does that happen? You have a $3 trillion increase in the net value of the Fortune 500 companies, $3 trillion increase in two years. Under George Bush, in eight years, it only increased by several hundred billion. You've had the Hire Act, the Republicans opposed it. It created hundreds of thousands of jobs. The Recovery Act, the Small Business Act.

MR. GREGORY: I know that. But I'm asking you a political question, which is, where do you create the discomfort? I mean, you, you, you know the game here as a senator.

SEN. KERRY: Right, let me tell you point blank . . . Here's what the president is doing. The president is fighting to get unemployment insurance that they have held hostage. This is the point. People need to focus in America. The Republicans have been willing to hold unemployment insurance hostage to this bonus tax cut that has the least impact and adds to the deficit. And the phony recklessness of their position is this, they've said for months, "We can't give you unemployment compensation because it's unpaid for and it will add to the deficit." But yesterday they were willing to vote for a $4 trillion increase that wipes out everything the debt commission is doing, in order to give a tax cut to the wealthiest people. Now, the president's prepared to compromise to get unemployment insurance, to get the work for pay tax cut, to get a child care credit tax cut, to get additional tax cuts that go to average people and will create jobs. But he wants to do more than that, and this is the most important difference between us and them . . .


read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40493580/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/

[undeterred]

1. The same John Kerry who fought for the recount in Ohio?

:shrug:

[karynnj]

56. He was advised that the votes were not there by the same team that told Gore to challenge

The fact is the Republicans suppress the vote - mostly by putting too few voting machines in Democratic strongholds. To change the result Kerry would have had to find more legally cast votes - and they didn't exist - and no one has proven otherwise.

As to Edwards, he LIED - he did and said nothing for two years and then spoke of challenging only in the blogospere.

[chimpymustgo]

79. karynnj, that is NOT true. Not to defend scum Edwards, but I spoke with someone who was IN THE ROOM

that night (a couple of days later), who told me EDWARDS did want to challenge the Ohio vote, but Kerry did not. I have posted this before - in the interest of historical accuracy.

[Major Hogwash]

86. I wasn't in that room

But, there were no signs of fraud at that time in Ohio, despite what came out later.

[karynnj]

88. I know of others who were there too - who absolutely disagree - and are on record

That evening, both were in favor of not conceding because there was a possibility that there were sufficient provisional ballots. That is why Kerry did NOT concede election night - as even Gore did, before the numbers changed in his favor. That was when your friend was in the room. As to Kerry wanting to concede, his daughters, likely far closer to him than your friend, spoke of not knowing Kerry would concede until the following morning, when they were told by their uncles - this was from a Larry King interview of the two women.

By the next day, it was clear that the number of outstanding provisional ballots were FAR too low to give Kerry a win - and in fact, they were counted and still led to a 59,000 gap. Kerry in his speech spoke of the fact that those ballots would be counted.

The fact is that Edwards was already into running himself - a path he likely saw from the minute he was selected by Kerry. It is completely obvious that he did not act as a good team player. He made the campaign look indecisive over something as trivial as a campaign slogan, when he proudly refused to use Kerry's. (This from Edwards, not the Kerry people.) The Kerry people also speak of him several times promising Kerry that he would fight Bush or defend Kerry, than not doing it. In the primaries, he was on; in the general election, his rallies looked completely rote - Elizabeth was the only asset to the campaign from that family.

You might want to consider that in 2007, Edwards raised this issue ONLY in the blogosphere, where people were receptive to it. NEVER answered was on what grounds he would have fought the Bush win. Even years later, with Democratic control, it has never been proven that enough legitimately cast votes went to Kerry in Ohio. Edwards was NOT an expert on campaign law and all the people who were told Kerry there was no case. How much you want to bet that your source was an Edwards person, whose source was Edwards on Kerry's position?

You might want to consider that Kerry has a decades long reputation for honesty - Edwards - let's just say that he doesn't.

The fact is That Kerry spoke out at least 10 times on voter suppression and electoral irregularities in 2005 - to the media, in speeches, and in the Senate - from Edwards - nothing. Back in 2007, many said that was because he was too busy helping Elizabeth, but he had the time to speak out on many other issues - and plenty of spare time for other activities - with Rielle.

[JI7]

98. So Why didn't Edwards fight, considering he fought Kerry on the use of a Slogan

and refused to say "help is on the way" and instead bragged about how he used his own message with "hope is on the way".

yet he refused to go against Kerry on something like fighting the election ??????????

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Why use one word when 600 would suffice?

[Bluerthanblue]

11. because one word WOULDN'T surfice.

not if you really care about the answer.

You criticize the way he says it, but don't you have anything worthwhile to say about the message?

[elleng]

32. Heck no.

:sarcasm:

[Individualist]

3. New Democrat Senator defends New Democrat President. Surprise, surprise.

[Bluerthanblue]

16. these days it IS a surprise. It shouldn't be, but it is.

we are destroying ourselves.

[karynnj]

57. Kerry is among the most liberal Senators we have

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Wielding Truth]

4. That's one voice in a big media venue. Now we need 100 more. NOW!!!

[Bluerthanblue]

12. +1. It'd be nice if we'd add some of our own voices to his,

but that doesn't seem likely.

:shrug:

[YvonneCa]

31. I posted VIDEO here...

...http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9694564

[ProSense]

5. Politico

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) blasted Republicans Sunday for pushing “fundamentally reckless” tax cuts for the rich, even as he reluctantly acknowledged the likelihood of an impending agreement that will extend them.

<...>

Kerry said the administration was coming to the table with the best interests of “average people” in mind.

"Now, the president’s prepared to compromise: to get unemployment insurance, to get the work for pay tax cut, to get a child care tax cut, to get additional tax cuts that go to average people and will create jobs,” Kerry said on NBC’s "Meet the Press.'

<...>

“The Republicans are fighting to keep in place a tax policy that has failed over the last eight years,” he said. “We have had a net loss of jobs. And what we’ve seen is a Republican party that’s absolutely prepared to deny unemployment insurance to people who have been laid off.”

Kerry had especially harsh words for what he called a Republican double standard.

“The Republicans have been willing to hold unemployment insurance hostage to this bonus tax cut that has the least (economic) impact and adds to the deficit,” he said, reflecting on votes through 2010. “And the phony recklessness of their position is this: they’ve said for months we can’t give you unemployment compensation because it’s unpaid for and it will add to the deficit. But yesterday they were willing to vote for a $4 trillion increase that wipes out everything the debt commission is doing in order to give a tax cut to the wealthiest people.”

link

[bigtree]

8. I went there first and I didn't like their spin

The transcript is much different than their account. They don't include his forceful assertion that the President isn't caving and his reasoning.

[ProSense]

10. Still, they reported his comments accurately.

Some people are busy accepting McConnell's speculations.

[Little Star]

6. A real fighter explaining what it means to not cave. Geesh!

[politicasista]

99. Ok. Let's trade Senators

You can have the two GOP senators Alexander and Corker, but keep Porno Brown. :rofl:

You can also have a soon to be GOP governor, a GOP controlled state house that could care less about people here.

You can also have new GOP congresspeople aka Teabaggers (one an domestic abuser of first wife, child support paying dodger, a gospel singer, one with an aide that sent a racist, spook-eyed pic of Obama).

You can have TN red-state agenda policies that are almost like AZ.


Luckily, it looks like there are some DUers that disagree with you and like Senator Kerry, sorry MA doesn't appreciate that and thinks of Kerry as like Bush. (Kinda like the Skulls and Bones thing). You can always elect another Brown.


Just sayin.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. OK. How about "Fold"? "Surrender"? "Sell-out"? "Concede"?

[Individualist]

9. Collaborate.

[bigtree]

15. of course those terms are only reserved by critics like Gregory for Democrats

. . . and our Democratic President; despite the fact that there are many Democratic-oriented tax initiatives and other economic matters that are being negotiated that would represent concessions from republicans if they prevail in a compromise bill.

I'll be waiting with baited breath for the same folks who've spent so much time branding our own Democratic legislators and the President cowards to offer the same rhetoric for republicans when they sign on to Democratic initiatives.

[B Calm]

13. Well Kerry knows all about caving in. . .

[ProSense]

19. And if

he endorses Obama, that's the end of his campaign.

"Say anything" for $500, Alex.

[yourout]

14. It's a strategic retreat.

or a frenchlike surrender to victory.

[TheWraith]

17. Kicked and recommended, but some people hate the facts. nt

[Egnever]

18. Way to go John!

Too bad many here will ignore your explanation.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HootieMcBoob]

26. But when the tax cuts are extended

And Obama doesn't veto them. He's not caving? What's he doing?

[hfojvt]

42. Kerry calls it compromising

I call it caving. Because instead of always talking about how "Obama is trying to find a compromise on this issue" - a compromise that I expect to be odious and disgusting. We are asking the President to fight. To hammer the Republicans on this and to keep hammering even if the tax cuts expire, because the blame will belong to the republicans who care more about the rich than they do about the middle class. Yet Obama and Kerry seem to be signalling "we won't fight for the middle class (or against the rich) either". Not a message that our party should be promoting.

[ProSense]

43. Actually,

it's not just Kerry and Obama.

Kucinich on GOP Compromise - Cenk on MSNBC

[hfojvt]

45. your point is that we cannot even find 5 fighters in this party

Then just get my nephew Lot out and obliterate the damn thing already.

[elleng]

34. ...

:thumbsup:

[hfojvt]

41. the stupid is not as puzzling as the hostility to Kerry

You'd think he was one of the Nelson twins or something. Or that you were reading the "we hate Democrats Underground"

[Major Hogwash]

21. K&R

Gregory did everything he could to make the Republican's argument for them, but it just defies logic.
Kerry was at the top of his form today.

[Catherina]

22. The same John Kerry who voted for the war? Of course he would. n/t

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[B Calm]

28. I voted for Kerry and he pissed me off when he caved in!

[ProSense]

30. You know what pissed me off

the revolution that didn't happen. Where are the revolutionaries? A lot of them are out these days trying to bring down a Democratic President.

[B Calm]

48. All revolutions have a leader, and where was Kerry?

[creon]

93. Yes

They are

The scorpion and the frog applies here

It is human nature though. No great surprise

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. But..but..the genius senator was "duped" by the very clever Bush..or, so he says now.

[Catherina]

35. John Edwards at least had the decency to admit that they weren't fooled

and voted for what they wanted, war with Iraq.

Fooled by Bush. One would have to be a total moron.

[ProSense]

38. "John Edwards at least had the decency "

:rofl:

[bigtree]

50. lol, my man JE

decency . . . didn't his wife find out about her cancer about the time of the concession?

[karynnj]

60. Edwards DID just that

Kerry's position was different than Edwards, he did vote to give Bush the leverage to get inspectors in there and to aid diplomacy - and that is how he would have used the authority if he were President. Something that was his consistent explanation for his vote from his speech before the vote until the present. Kerry has said that his vote was wrong in 2005, before Edwards said anything. Unlike Edwards, Kerry spoke against rushing to war on January 23, 2003 before the war started in March. Something Edwards never did.

Kerry always said that the US should only go to war as a last resort.

Kerry in 2003 always was against the war - Edwards was actually for it - so their positions were different.

Kerry never said Bush fooled him.

Kerry has more decency and integrity in his little finger than John Edwards has in his whole body.

[Major Hogwash]

69. The same John Edwards the grand jury in Washington is investigating?

Good luck with that!

[krabigirl]

70. +5 million

[elleng]

25. 'The president insisted

that we have the votes that we had yesterday so that America could see what the Republicans are fighting for, and they could see what we're fighting for.'

[JDPriestly]

29. I'd like to hear ProSense's defense of Kerry on this.

The president and the Democratic Congress should be holding the ideas of the Republicans hostage, but instead Democrats are trying to "compromise." (meaning letting the rich and powerful have their way.)

I watched Invictus last night, the story of Nelson Mandela bringing South Africa together through a winning rugby team.

I suspect that Obama's acquiescence to the Republicans on virtually every issue has been inspired by Mandela's example, the example of a leader uniting a country.

Unfortunately, Obama is not at a similar point in history or the same juncture of power or relationship with the Republicans as Nelson Mandela was in terms of the white minority in South Africa.

In South Africa, by the time Nelson Mandela was released from prison and elected president, the pro-Apartheid minority had been chastened by the successful boycotts by western nations that had damaged the South African economy. The pro-Apartheid minority was on its knees. It had been defeated.

The majority that opposed the pro-Apartheid minority were clearly in power and the pro-Apartheid minority could no longer resist or meaningfully oppose that majority. Further, the pro-Apartheid minority had little if any meaningful support outside of South Africa and they knew it.

In the US, the Republicans and their absurd economic theories were never humiliated as was the pro-Apartheid minority in South Africa.

This is not just about Obama. It is about the future of our country. Obama needs to forget about the example of Nelson Mandela. It is not time for reconciliation. First the wrongs have to be righted. That means allowing the prosecution of the torturers in the Bush administration and the outing of the facts that led to our illegal invasion of Iraw.

Reconciliation and forgiveness are wonderful. But they do not replace repentance or enlightenment. You can forgive and wish to reconcile an opponent all you want. But your forgiveness and willingness to reconcile does not guarantee that your opponent will also want to forgive and reconcile or will be willing to change. We forgive and reconcile for our own spiritual wellbeing. It is not a substitute for fighting for change.

The Republicans are stubborn and unwilling to compromise. Obama has to face that reality. I understand his dream of reconciliation, and I hope that as a nation we eventually achieve it. But first Obama has to win this struggle for the ordinary people of the US -- those of us living on far less than $250,000 per year. We are the people who are being crushed. Obama cannot compromise.

According to the movie Invictus, this poem, "Invictus" gave Nelson Mandela strength during his imprisonment.

OUT of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance 5
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

. . .

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate: 15
I am the captain of my soul.

William Ernest Henley. 1849–1903

http://www.bartleby.com/103/7.html

Says nothing about giving in to your tormentors or to the cruelly greedy, nothing.

[YvonneCa]

33. Maybe it's time to turn off the movies and watch Kerry actually...

...said: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9694564

[ProSense]

36. What the hell are you talking about? You want to hear my defense of Kerry

on something about Mandela?

If you're interested in knowing why compromise is necessary, here, let Kucinich explain it: Kucinich on GOP Compromise - Cenk on MSNBC


Now, why exactly are you directing this question to me in response to an OP I didn't start?

[Warren DeMontague]

52. I believe that's known, in the parlance,

as a call-out.

[JDPriestly]

66. For fun! Have you read your journal lately?

[karynnj]

82. WTH are you alluding to

There is nothing in her journal that you contradicts her position here. The most recent item is Kerry taking over the SFRC, which was announced 2 years ago.

[politicasista]

96. Coming from someone that said "Kerry is everything that is wrong with the Senate"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


Sounds like Edwards supporters are bitter over getting duped by him. They seem to be the ones touting he and Momma T's dough aka wealth. And some of them still bash Obama here.

[karynnj]

104. they need to watch this

Teresa and Elizabeth answered the wealth question beautifully - from the Edwards' home - http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=628737n&tag=related

[politicasista]

106. bingo

Why that continues to be ignored we may never know. SOH (shake our heads).

[karynnj]

81. You are right that the situation you discribe in SA is nothing like the current USA

The fact is that the Democrats hold a worse hand than the Republicans on this - and it significantly worsened after the election.

Obama wanted a vote before the election, but could not force it. He publicly asked for it - and many Democrats pushed for it - even though everyone knew they did not have the votes in the Senate. (The House saw it as a difficult vote for some and given that the senate would not pass it, they opted not to vote as well.)

The fact is the Republicans KNOW with certainty that if this is no resolved this year, they can re-instate them next year - as long as they prevent the middle class taxes from being separately made permanent. There is NO way to get a middle class only bill out of the House next year. In addition, the Republicans are less likely to care if on January 1 the old rates resume for all. It sets them up to be the hero as they cut everyone's taxes - even if, given the economy, it might be better to let the tax increases expire. Politically, that would be a nightmare, not just for Obama, but for all Democrats running in 2012.

Against that backdrop, Obama an the Democrats are trying to get many needed things added to this compromise. But, consider the only ace the democrats hold is that Obama has veto power. The value of that rests with his willingness to use it.

(One random side comment - Reading the Catfood commission stuff (less well than I should - does anyone have a good link to anything detailed and official?), it is clear they are calling for revamping the entire tax system. If that happens, these tax cuts are moot - once that happens. That might be the real battle to fight. Not that that means it is a reasonable idea to extend the Bush tax cuts. In fact, looking at somethings people have cited of their plan, it would be better to argue that in shared sacrifice instead. )

[Better Believe It]

37. Kerry also thinks the NAFTA-style Korea trade agreement is a wonderful bi-partisan accomplishment

Senator John Kerry

“I am happy to hear that the United States and South Korea have reached a deal on the Korea-U.S. Trade Agreement, and look forward to reviewing the pact and working hard to secure its early ratification. The Obama administration is sparing no effort to send Congress an agreement that can help create jobs and revitalize our economy, and I am pleased the President made the politically difficult decision to take the time to get this deal done right for America. I understand that there are beef export issues that have not been resolved and urge the administration to continue pushing for better access to the Korean market for American beef as we move forward.

“KORUS represents an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to fair and open markets, and for the new Congress to demonstrate that in spite of today’s highly polarized political environment, bipartisan cooperation in the national interest remains attainable. New export opportunities in South Korea for U.S. companies will generate good paying American jobs and contribute to our economic recovery. Moreover, this agreement delivers an important message to an ever closer ally and the region at a time of uncertainty on the Korean Peninsula.

“For many, KORUS has become a symbol of the United States’ commitment to the region and our appreciation of its increasingly important role in international commerce. It is essential that the United States enhance its economic presence in Asia and compete on a level playing field with other exporters in the region. Ratification of KORUS is an important step forward that will have enormously positive economic and political implications for our country in the years ahead.”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/12/04/additional-statements-support-us-korea-trade-agreement

[ProSense]

39. So does Sander Levin and the UAW.

It's a great statement.

[Recursion]

59. FTW (nt)

[Freddie Stubbs]

101. Just because you call something "NAFTA-style" doesn't mean that it is NAFTA-style

Unlike NAFTA, this would not eliminate all tariffs.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

40. K&R

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WinkyDink]

46. As usual, Kerry is verbose. To put it politely.

[bigtree]

47. funny

I though he was succinct, considering the question Gregory asked and the inferences he was making.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JI7]

51. considering there were some on here who wanted to unite with the teabaggers

and felt sympathy for them it's no surprise.

just look at how fucked up this thread is. rather than discussing the issue they start with attacks on Kerry for things unrelated.

but post something Ron Paul said and you will see them going on about how he is a great guy.

it really says a lot about those who have been attacking Obama and now Kerry for defending them .

[knotwurstforware]

53. I agree he is not caving

Obama is doing exactly what is being asked of him.

[bigtree]

54. kick

[defendandprotect]

55. When someone in your party has to come out to say you're "not caving" .....

wow!

And, actually, I think at this point we're finished with John Kerry!

[CakeGrrl]

64. GREGORY used the term that you love to throw around here, and Kerry countered it.

And of course you'd be done with Kerry. He isn't going with the current popular opinion on DU that freely and unabashedly calls a Dem president a green, weak, naive, capitulating loser.

Gee, why didn't he say that on National TV for all to hear? Beck and Limbaugh could've put that footage in their spank banks!!

This place is more bizarre by the day.

[karynnj]

89. Isn't that the truth?

This forum is pretty far out here and it would have been a huge betrayal for any Democrat to come out as people here clearly want. That would not be the Kerry that I respect. At this point, Kucinich and Grayson are too temperate for some here.

[defendandprotect]

112. Think you've directed your rant at the wong poster...

but I can see it becoming immediately popular among liberals and think it

originated in liberal press --

Nor have I ever suggested Obama is "green, weak, naive, nor capitulating loser" --

I have said clearly that we need a new liberal Democratic candidate in 2012 --

and I agree with Hartmann's indirect suggestion that obama should announce that he

is stepping down in 2012 --

Hartman asked last week: "Should Obama announce that he will step down in 2012?"

Also I have no idea what you're claiming Kerry said --

I do follow what Biden has been saying for more than a year -- and that's been to

try to push Israel to attack Iran -- he's repeatedly made references to Israel being

"justified" in doing so!!


This administration and what's left of the Democratic Party is becoming more "bizarre"

every day -- !!

[Recursion]

58. And now DU realizes Kerry heads the Senate DLC caucus

And the long knives are sharpened, and the bus is made ready to throw him under.

[karynnj]

61. Al From did not list Kerry as a DLC possible contender in 2006

when he listed Vilsack, Warner, and Bayh - in addition to Hillary, even though Kerry outpolled all three of them. Kerry is among the most liberal Senators by all measures.

Not to mention Kerry was Kennedy's choice in 2004 and in 2008, until Kerry opted not to run.

[Recursion]

62. Kerry leads the Senate New Democrat Coalition

He is literally the highest DLC Dem in elected office at this point.

[ProSense]

63. "He is literally the highest DLC Dem in elected office at this point."

What nonsense. Lieberman is actually in the DLC. Kerry is not, and never supported their positions.

[karynnj]

78. Adding the word "literally" does not make your claim more legimate

Kerry has not been active with either the New Democrats or DLC since at least 2004. He has not gone to their events, not been in their leadership or had anything on their websites. Not to mention, his voting record was always an outlier.

The list that you guys put up so often is a list that was compiled using the last DLC list from early 2000s or the 1990s, which removed everyone out of office. I should remind you that Dean was DLC at that time - as was Edwards. In fact, the big difference was that Edwards had a voting record similar to Bayh, while Kerry's was closer to Kennedy's.

Kerry is also not part of the Senate Democratic leadership. He is chair of SFRC, by right of seniority and he is doing a wonderful job at that.

PS IF the DLC were the power you make it out to be and members would follow the leader, you should only wish that Kerry were their leader - but, if so, why is Harold Ford the official leader?

Not to mention, explain that most of the DLC loudly bashed Kerry in 2005 and 2006 - and as I said From did not name him - when he mentioned far less likely people.

[Ramulux]

65. Blah blah blah blah

Am I the only one who literally feels nothing when democrats say shit like this. Do they really think we are so pathetic that we wont actually look at what they are DOING and not just listen to what they are SAYING. I just dont fucking trust them anymore.

[demwing]

67. blah blah blah

John Kerry lost me in Ohio.

[demwing]

68. Oh sheesh spooky I did NOT see Post 65 /nt

[rhett o rick]

71. Isnt Sen Kerry the same guy that "caved" to bush in 2004. Conceded in spite of election fraud.

He might as well have gotten on his knees and kissed little bushy's feet. When are we going to find Democrats willing to fight?

[karynnj]

94. Kerry did not have the cast votes to contest - and no Democratic lawyer

supported it. Would you have him play the role of Norm Coleman, fighting on long after it was clear there were no votes left to look at. Even RFKjr's Rolling Stone article relied on estimates of votes lost due to 4 hour plus lines. (RFKjr has called Kerry an environmental hero as recently as a few months ago - he clearly does not and never did blame Kerry for not refusing to concede.)

As to fight - fight he did. He was one of many democrats who worked hard to get victories in 2006 an 2008.

[rhett o rick]

111. Would I have him fight? Yes, please would some Democrat please, please FIGHT. We are dying here. nm

[Liquorice]

72. I don't understand why Obama won't come out and explain what the republicans are doing

and why it is bad for the economy and the country. Why doesn't he just tell the American people exactly what Kerry said--that republicans are holding unemployment insurance hostage. He needs to fight them publicly.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liquorice]

74. Well at this point, I'm not really sure who is running the country. nt

[Radical Activist]

114. He does. The press ignore it and the netroots go along.

[demwing]

75. If the intended effect was to depress me into never bothering to vote again

its only half working.

I'm just tired of voting Dem. I'm tired of supporting people who don't support us.

I'm tired of pretenders. I'm tired of pretense, and I'm tired of the way I have felt about myself for pretending that it didn't matter.

[2Design]

76. it does matter and even though it isn't what we want under the old man

and the beauty queen it would be so much worse. It sucks, don't get me wrong but it would suck worse with the others. Unfortunately others didn't see that for the midterm and let the suckers back in to suck more out of the country - not sure how it will end up but maybe it is only delayed by having this president versus the other one we might have gotten if more crazies had voted

[Skittles]

77. talk out your ass all you want, John

it's a fucking disaster

[rug]

80. "His preferred position is $250,000." Weasel words.

[karynnj]

83. Given that neither Obama or Kerry have dictatorial positions, those are not weasel words

That is what they prefer and have preferred for years.

[rug]

84. I prefer that line in the sand over there.

But if I don't get it I will say at least I am not Benito Mussolini.

In the meantime, the Republicans continue their march to Rome.

[politicasista]

97. He seems more courageous then most people here are

so much for "weasel" words. But don't let your Kerry/Obama bashing stop you.

[budkin]

87. Kerry... the ultimate fighter... right...

[JustAnotherGen]

90. Read through all the comments

Here's what could REALLY help us Senator Kerry - Tell the Preisdent that every single meeting between he and the Republicans needs to occur in an open forum. NOTHING behind closed doors. This way we can see clearly where the President stands in his discussions with the Teaps.

Maybe then I can see him cross his arms, get a face of stone, and in response to everything the Teap Leadership says: Shake his head right then left and say, "No! 250K or less."

Teap says something : "No. 250 or less". Those need to be the only words necessary for compromise.

Then after he exhausts them turn to the Senators and say, "In 2012 I'm putting a list on my campaign site stating who voted against the unemployed - including Democratics"

Don't know how this is coming across in writing - but I guess I'm saying I'd like transparent Obstruction and 'black mailing' by the President.

[WizardLeft62]

91. Obama is Caving

Obama is Caving indeed.

And if he is not caving, then he might as well change his affiliation to the Republican Party because it is now clear there is only ONE POLITICAL PARTY NOW OPERATING HERE IN THE USA.

So, again, going by the premise that Obama is not caving, then one can only deduce that the Democratic Party doesn't give a rat's ass abput anyone but their bankerster pals on Wall Street and never really opposed the Bush tax cuts in the first place.

This is beyond politics at this point in the theatre of the absurd.

It's downright despicable and Mr.Obama ought to be ashemed of himself so much that he does not seek a second term. Other Democrats who vote fot this tax cut for the upper two percent shouldn't expect voter support in their next elections either.

[spanone]

92. one voice in the wilderness does not make it so

[politicasista]

95. Yikes. How did this thread go back to the 2004, DLC, Ohio time machine?

A lot of people will bash him for rambling incoherently and having a lot of dough (slang for money), but the Senator Kerry still has some valuable voice.

Sorry it isn't coming from the words of favorite liberals around here, but all the other info isn't relevant to the topic at hand. Or they just mad that Obama still listens to him. Their problem.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

100. kick

:kick:

[beforeyoureyes]

102. Yeah, this from the man who turned on his back on the tens of thousands of voters

...who waited in line in Ohio and were deliberately turned away or not counted...

Sorry, Mr. Kerry...not interested.

[avaistheone1]

103. Senator who evades paying $500,000 on luxury yacht tells us extending the taxes cuts for the rich is

is good, and that it is not caving.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:



John Kerry Saves By Docking 76-Foot Luxury Yacht Out Of State
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/john-kerry-saves-500000-b_n_656985.html

[defendandprotect]

115. Kerry's $7 million yacht now parked in RI, while MA didn't get $500,000 taxes....

Nothing like helping his home state!!

Thanks -- hadn't heard this before --

sad --

but just a little clearer where's he's coming from in pushing tax cuts for rich!!!

Our entire Congress is millionaires or multi-millionaires and we're expecting them

to represent our interests!! :evilgrin:

[Jeffersons Ghost]

105. kick

:kick:

[Jeffersons Ghost]

107. kick

:kick:

[Mass]

108. Does not matter. Kerry haters are here.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

109. I've fought those freeper-types for years and I'm not done yet

[Mass]

110. I know, but some here are just worse than those people who post in the Boston Herald.

At least, in the Herald, I know these are freepers. Here, there is still a doubt.

[defendandprotect]

116. Tossing the "haters" label around didn't work re Obama as I'm sure you realize ....

and it's equally inane re Kerry --

Stop the personal attacks and try to deal with the info --

Like Kerry's $7 million yacht -- and saving $500,000 in taxes to MA by parking it in RI --

Fine -- a little dirty but not illegal --

But then this multi-millionaire turns around and tells us what a good thing

tax cuts for the rich are?

[Radical Activist]

113. So Obama did stick it to the Republicans by forcing them to show who they really fight for.

Instead of highlighting that fact, the netroots is going along with the corporate media narrative attacking Obama. Damn that's dumb.

[Major Hogwash]

117. No, you don't get it. Only Democrats are unemployed, and only rich people are Republicans.

So, the Democrats have to be helped along by the Republicans because the Democrats are spineless and don't know how to stand up for themselves, and the Republicans need more money because, well, they're Republicans, you know how Republicans are, one yacht is cool and groovy, but hey, two is twice as nice.

So, Obama realizing that all of the unemployed are pot smoking hippies from his party, you know, his base, he had to do something.
Now, it was against his principles of ever giving into Republican's demands, but they had him by the unemployment checks, you might say, figuratively, so he let them have their big money tax cut for 2 more years so the hippies could buy more brown rice, Macaroni and Cheese dinners, and green tea for the next 13 months and hope that somehow one of the corporations in their state starts hiring in that time.

The budget can be balanced, and we all know that Democrats can't do it because they are spineless, so the budget will have to be balanced on backs of the poor and the unemployed because the rich, well, mostly the Republicans, all of them, not just the rich ones, don't want to balance the budget the old fashioned way, with tax raises to help pay down the deficits.
The rich Republicans, most of them anyway, just want to go back to the old way of accounting, like they did under Bush during his two terms, and just not account for the cost of both of the wars that Bush started, and that should make our books look better and then our country's bond rating will improve, and we can borrow more money from the Chinese to put in our banks, the ones we bailed out, so we can spend more money, because we certainly aren't saving any of it.

It's easy to understand when you look at the whole picture.
Hope this helps.