How retail politics works in MA.

[Mass]

This column about an absurd dispute is very indicative of what you see here (and a bad sign for Warren, if it continues, as Brown is particularly adept at using it, while she has not).

First, let's just say that, independently of whomever did it, I am happy to see this person and free and with his family. This is what matters.

But it is a good illustration of how the claim Kerry does not care about constituents' problems came to life. This is an example to the extreme, but this is typical of the complaint. Here, it leads to the absurd claim by a local well-known reverend that Brown made the liberation of the hostage happen because he was faster to call the family and tell them the hostage was free (I suspect that Kerry's staff at the SFRC has a lot more to do with that, and the State Department even more, but Brown has somebody make the claim!)

Yes, this claim is absurd (and Vennoachi recognizes it), but it is a good illustration of what many people have said of Kerry's approach to constituents' problems, and the truth is that Brown is particularly good at it (I had another example in Western Mass, where Brown was in Springfield a few days ago, congratulating a local fireman for something he did -- or a medal he won ---). During the same time, Democrats are very absent.

http://bostonglobe.com/opinion/2012/07/18/after-hostage-release-john-kerry-and-scott-brown-compete-for-credit/FqPeHV2dPMP3KHRSshgL8N/story.html

A man of God needed help, along with a woman who was taken hostage with him.

Rescuing them was “not a Democratic thing. It’s not a Republican thing. It’s a Kingdom thing,” said the Rev. Matthew K. Thompson, after the Rev. Michel Louis of Dorchester and Lissa Alphonse of Everett, were released by their Egyptian captor on Monday.

But in the kingdom of Massachusetts, it’s also a power and glory thing.

First, there were joyful prayers of thanksgiving. Then, there was grappling over who, besides the Creator, should get credit for the rescue.


That honor went to Republican Senator Scott Brown. “He made this happen,” said Rev. Eugene F. Rivers III, who was with the Louis family when Brown’s office called with news that the captives were safe.
...
And upset they were. Said a source familiar with Kerry’s role, “to hear that Brown ‘got it done’ was bizarre.” The source, who did not want to be named, described Brown’s involvement as minimal: a Brown staffer was in touch with the State Department’s Operations Center over the weekend, and on Monday, the State Department provided that staffer with an e-mail update. “For those who work here, that’s like calling the Capitol operator to see if the Senate is in session, and then saying that Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid are working with you,” the source said.

According to a chronology put together by Kerry’s office, a son of the kidnapped minister called Kerry’s office on Friday. Kerry’s team worked on it over the weekend. As part of the effort to get the hostages released, Kerry spoke twice by phone with US Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson and offered to meet with Egyptian officials. Brown also reportedly spoke once with Patterson.

On Monday, after the hostages were released, Kerry also arranged a satellite phone call so relatives in Massachusetts could speak directly with their loved ones. That day, Kerry also spoke with family members in Massachusetts.

For Kerry, waiting so long to make that call to relatives was probably a mistake. Brown had been talking to them since Friday, when the hostages were taken. That’s when Thompson and Rivers called Peter Flaherty, a Brown senior adviser. Flaherty then called Brown, who quickly got in touch with family members and gave them his cell phone number.

“I’m not saying Kerry didn’t do anything,” said Rivers. “But they heard from Brown within an hour. It’s not my fault Scott Brown gives his cellphone number out.”

Asked to provide detailed information about what Brown did personally, spokesman John Donnelly said: “Senator Brown is thankful to American and Egyptian officials, and Senator Kerry’s office, for the team effort in securing the release of the hostages. They are safe and will soon be reunited with their families.

[ladym55]

1. I posted on this earlier in the Kerry group

Unfortunately I don't have a link because this was a caller to the Stephanie Miller show in June. THAT caller talked about how Kerry's office straightened out a giant health care mess with the VA in a week ... and how they never heard a word in response from Brown's office.

So glad to see that Brown milked this situation to the hilt.

[karynnj]

3. I saw your other post and it was a really nice story

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1109902#post6

One similarity to this story is that Kerry's staff worked with the government and he called the person after they fixed things. It might be that Kerry wanted to find out what the state department, including the SoS and the our ambassador and the Egyptians had to say before speaking to the family. That is a judgement call. Calling immediately would maybe comfort the family that the government was working on this, but they would have questions that he could not answer at that point. They already knew his office was working on it.

That does not mean Brown was wrong. He did not have Kerry's contacts with the ambassador, the SoS, or the Egyptians.

[karynnj]

2. I agree that Brown might have gained points on the politics here

but if you turned the roles around - and had a young Kerry positioning himself as being instrumental when he almost certainly wasn't, he would have been pounded by the media. As it is, he still has in recent months had people - even some Democrats - repeating the "Live Shot" smear - I saw it on Blue Mass Group. (This might be unfair to Brown as it was one of the ministers who gave Brown the credit - though the assessment of the Kerry aides that Brown's role was minimal is likely to be very accurate.)

Here, I think that Brown did a good thing in calling the family. It appears the difference is that where Kerry and his staff worked the weekend with the state department, Kerry personally did not speak to the family until he could tell them they were released - and he set up the satellite phone call. I would imagine that Kerry's staff was updating the son who contacted them on what was being done. Not to mention, there are no quotes from the family itself. It is possible that the Senator called them at some point. The point of the reverend's comment was that it was Brown who called them with the good news. (Could it be Vennocci who is blowing this up?)

Note that in your last quoted paragraph, that rather than answer the question of what Brown PERSONALLY did, the spokesperson ignored the question and referred to all involved.

What is interesting is that the Boston Herald story on the release actually has up front the satellite call that they credit Kerry with arranging and later in the article mention both Brown and Kerry called the son. http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?&articleid=1061146209&format=&page=1&listingType=Loc#articleFull

Another source mentioned the state department was updating the mother (who was also on the trip) every few hours.

[Mass]

4. I am talking about the politics here. Politics matter, particularly in an electoral year

when who will be our next Senator will be decided by a handful of true independents, who see Brown as moderate and dont know much about Warren. They often decide on impressions that have little to do with what Brown will do, but whether he seems to care enough to talk to real people about their individual problems.

Coakley lost because of things like that. Any sentient being knew she was the best prepared to be a senator (compared to Brown, I mean. Capuano was better prepared, but never made it through the primary). However, Brown connected, seemed to care about people's problems on an individual level, and won.

It does not matter if Vennochi made this a bigger story that it is. Rivers is influential in Boston, and this is a story among many on how Brown connects to people and seems to care.

I am not posting this as a reflection of Kerry vs Brown. It would be stupid. Kerry is a lot better than the media credit him to be on these issues. I am posting this as an example of how things work in MA (if your last name is not Kennedy, I mean), and why Brown, despite all his weaknesses (political and at the policy level), is still leading Warren in most polls. Contact matters. Seeming to care about individuals matter as much as big ideas.

[karynnj]

5. I see what you are saying - and it is not good news

I have noticed that Brown has often managed to position himself to get that type of credit - as someone who does connect with real people. I realize that is a huge ace for him - and likely why none of the completely stupid things he has said have seemed to hurt him much.

[demguy_5692]

6. excellent post

explains it all so well.

[beachmom]

7. Yeah, Mass. is kind of a strange state.

Nobody would write a column like that down here. I mean, Sen. Isaakson did some really good work when a family I knew of had a daughter who was murdered while serving in the Peace Corps in Africa. But it was something Isaakson was working on from the beginning. He went to the funeral, he was in constant contact with the family, and he got a law passed. I don't know if Chambliss got involved at all. But the stories that ran down here were more about the family and all that Sen. Isaakson did. I may add the family were Democrats -- the Dad volunteered for the Obama campaign at the same office I did. So I knew first hand about all that happened. Of course, Pres. Obama signed the bill, but it was Isaakson who worked hard to get it all done (Boxer helped, too). It was through the SFRC committee but I think it sailed through.

My point is, if Kerry was handling it, why was Brown following him around like a puppy dog? I mean, Kerry is the chairman of the SFRC and has all the contacts.

Edited out part I am unsure of.