Deleted message

[Name removed]

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

[JohnKleeb]

1. umm none

Only reason why I dont support him is because I prefer Kucinich, I really think Kerry is one of the best in the bunch. To the follow up, I think he would make a good president yes.

[robbedvoter]

2. His attitude about Coup 2000. And yes.NT

[sandnsea]

14. crying in your teacups?

I've never seen the speech this supposedly comes from so I've never seen it in context. But I don't think he ever made forget it, rather that focusing on it alone is a waste of energy. Use that energy to fight back and win.

Get over it, then stand up proud and strong and fight to win.

[Sliverofhope]

I think Kerry needs some reconsideration

Reading everything I have, I really see Kerry as a good potential candidate. I'm throwing my support behind him, because I think he needn't go down in flames. He has so many important people, like Rand Beers. He should really get them to speak up.

Pete, I know you got Pitt into the Franken meeting. Do you happen to have Kerry's ear, by any chance?

He has some good cards, he just needs to play them. I don't know about the timing, but if the choice is between irrelevancy or risk taking, some risks might be worth it.

My post has no number. Is it even readable?

[jjmalonejr]

54. Good decision.

Yes, your post is readable.

And Kerry is the man. Don't send them a message. Send them a President.

[greendog]

3. Kerry's a free trader...

that's a deal breaker for me.

[sandnsea]

15. He's fought for fair trade regulations

Environmental, labor and human rights. He fought for them in the Jordan trade bill and uses that as a model for what he'd like to do. He is not a Bush free trader, but he also sees trade as necessary to improve the lives of people in 3rd world countries. He also sees science and technology and continuing education as the way for the U.S. to always have jobs and growth. An education system with all the necessary federal backing so people can always move forward.

[greendog]

46. How'd he vote on NAFTA and GATT?

n/t

[sandnsea]

52. I said he believes in global trade

And I said why. We can't leave all these countries around the world to just sit in their poverty. Trade is the only way to help them, in the long run. He has always tried to get environmental and labor amendments in them and has sometimes succeeded. Once you begin trade, then cultural exchange takes place and we can have more positive influence in these countries. Just like we should open trade with Cuba. We'll make alot more progress then to continue harmful sanctions and leave them cut off from the world. It opens up the exchange of ideas and people begin to demand better living conditions and we begin to demand that for them as well, then the environmental, labor and human rights improvements are implemented. I believe in engagement with the world, not protectionist isolationism. It's the right way to go.

[greendog]

118. How's the poverty rate in Mexico since NAFTA?

n/t

:)

[sandnsea]

139. Overall

Conditions in Mexico are improving.

http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/indicator/cty_f_MEX.html

I'm not saying I approve of what these corporations are doing around the world. But leaving things as they were isn't helpful either. There are ways to invest in the people of countries without doing it through corporatism. Trade is one step in opening these countries up. There's plenty of other steps that have to happen as well and I've just read enough of Kerry's plans to know he gets it. He attends almost every single international environmental conference, not as an emissary for the U.S., just because he believes it's important. Of all the candidates, he knows the ins and outs of this particular issue best and has the dedication to the problem to move forward.

[greendog]

152. Interesting....

A couple years ago I read that serious poverty in Mexico had increased from somewhere around 35% to around 50% after several years of NAFTA. I didn't see anything in the stats you presented that confirmed or contradicted that.

Unfortunatly, I don't remember where I read it.

I did find a good article from "The Progressive" that relates to free trade in Mexico. http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1295/9_66/91752249/p1/article.jhtml?term=

There's no doubt that among the corporatists running for the dem nomination, Kerry has the best "liberal credentials". If you're willing to settle for a liberal corporatist, he's your guy.

I'll agree that his brand of free trade is better than Bush's but I find it curious that he voted to give "fast track" authority to Bush.

Personally, I can't support that kind of politics. Free trade = Deal breaker for me.

:)

[sandnsea]

157. UN report

Here's a UN report.
http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/ep010926poverty.html

Poverty has increased in RURAL Mexico, but improved overall.

There's pros and cons to global trade. The ONLY candidate who is willing to repeal NAFTA, etc., is Kucinich. Speaking frankly, Kucinich is not going to win. So who do you trust to deal fairly with the world after that? Who has proven time and again that he cares? Who didn't put politics over Yucca Mtn & Sierra Blanca? Who has advocated global AIDS legislation time and again? Of the candidates who have a chance to win, I trust Kerry to both understand the need to help other countries around the world, the need to do it more fairly, and the need to make sure we're moving ahead here at home so we aren't hurt in the process.

[greendog]

166. You have a good argument....

It's true that things don't look good for Kucinich....and Kerry has a good record on many things, however I'm digging my heels in on this one.

There are two issues that seperate Greens from mainstream Democrats where the Greens seem to be on the side of the majority of the American population. One is single payer healthcare and the other is this matter of the export of our middle class jobs to third world countries by greedy corporations.

The only thing that prevents politicians like John Kerry from siding with the majority of Americans is their dependence on corporate contributions. The only way "we the people" will break this system is by refusing to support it.

The corporations are quite happy to offer the choice of someone like Kerry as a relief valve from the "evil" Bush. They'd probably prefer Bush, but they really have no problem with Kerry.

I'll support Kucinich in the primaries and vote Green in the general election unless one of the mainstream candidate finds the courage to side with the majority of Americans on these issues.

Doesn't seem like much to ask.....just side with the majority and against the corporations.

:)

[greyowl]

155. The only way trade would help third world countries would be if....

Companies setting up in Mexico were forced to pay their workers equivalent wages to what is earned in the US. Lets face it...the rest of the world makes the goods we use (at the expense of the us worker and middle class). We are the ones buying them back...NOT CHINA. That being said I would rather keep the middle class we have and force other countries to raise wages if they even wanted to think about having the US buy their products.

[sandnsea]

156. I agree

Every candidate supports this. So, like the post says, what's the beef with Kerry?

[Hep]

4. Changing the debate

I hold Kerry partly responsible for changing the debate.

With IWR, he was among those who changed the debate from "should we go to war" to "How and when should we go to war"

With Bush's budget, he helped change the debate from "Should there be tax cuts" to "How big should they be?"

I'm offended when the left grants the right's premise.

As to the followup, I don't know what kind of a president he would be. I'm a Dean supporter and I don't speculate as to what kind ofa president he would be. I want to think both would be very good presidents, but Kerry is lending insight into his personality, and I don't like what I see.

[jjmalonejr]

27. We SHOULD change the debate

Respectfully, Hep,

With IWR, Kerry's position was and remains that it was legitimate for the United States to threaten force in order to get weapons inspectors back into Iraq. It worked. Saddam backed down and let them in, which surprised the hell out of Bush & Co. who'd hoped that would be the excuse for their war. If there really were any WMD's there, weapons inspectors would have found them. Had Saddam refused to let inspectors in and grant them full cooperation, the UN and our allies would have been much more sympathetic with our position. This was a win-win situation if Bush hadn't messed the whole thing up (to use a polite word).


With respect to tax cuts, the question wasn't "How big should they be?", it was "Who should they go to?" Kerry has fought all his career for the middle class and the working poor. His message to other Democrats is that we should KEEP the tax cuts which help average Americans, a small portion of the actual cuts and the ones that Democrats fought tooth and nail to get the Republicans to concede to.

Kerry's positions are wise, folks. He has excellent judgement produced by years of valuable experience. If we don't make this guy President, we are crazy!

[Donna Zen]

151. You are correct...and thank you.

With IWR, Kerry's position was and remains that it was legitimate for the United States to threaten force in order to get weapons inspectors back into Iraq. It worked. Saddam backed down and let them in, which surprised the hell out of Bush & Co. who'd hoped that would be the excuse for their war. If there really were any WMD's there, weapons inspectors would have found them. Had Saddam refused to let inspectors in and grant them full cooperation, the UN and our allies would have been much more sympathetic with our position. This was a win-win situation if Bush hadn't messed the whole thing up (to use a polite word).

[bearfartinthewoods]

106. you do understand that we are nominating a candidate to be prez of the

entire country and not just the left wing? we can't have DK and get him elected. if Kerry were DK and held all of DK's positions, we couldn't get him elected either.

don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[LuminousX]

5. A pattern emerges

Kerry plays it safe too much. He isn't a bold risk taker. He would make a good president.

[jjmalonejr]

57. Where?

Besides the IWR, where in his career do you seem him playing it safe?

[bearfartinthewoods]

108. as weird as it to say it, you are right.

another term for a bold risk taker is reckless.

you need a steady hand at the helm of a ship this big because you can't do sharp turns without capsizing and causing tsumamis around the world.

[BeFree]

6. Nothng personal

But he has been part of the Establishment for such a long, long time.

America needs an 'outsider'.

Would Kerry make an outstanding president? I see nothing outstanding about him, his being embedded for so long and all that. Is he a good dem? Yeah. I wish him well.

[sendero]

34. Exactly....

... with all his "service" and "experience", what has he done for us lately? Nothing.

As a friend pointed out to me recently, how many sitting senators have moved into the white house in recent history? How many governors?

There is a reason for this. And I rest my case.

[seaglass]

116. That's sad that you would use the fact that

Kerry has dedicated his life to public service, to helping others as a reason to not vote for him.

[bearfartinthewoods]

134. this quest for an outsider is understandable but the timing suxs

the country is split 50-50 and the election will be a squeaker.
a new dem prez will have no overwhelming mandate.
he will have a pubbie congress. the last thing we need, if anything is going to get done is an outsider. we need someone who already has allies.

irrc, one of the things that brought Carter down was his "outsider" status. it made him ineffectual for the begining.

[in_cog_ni_to]

7. I don't know.

I think the fact his wife is the Heinz ketchup lady may have something to do with it. The IWR was the main reason and I really hated watching him attack Dean in the debates and Dean attacking back...a real turn off for me. I like how Wes Clark has taken the high road in the candidate bashing, he's a self made man and is everything I could ever want in a president and MORE! :)

On edit...this is shallow and I know it, but...he's not attractive.. IMCPO

[HFishbine]

8. Hard to put my finger on it

But there is no doubt that Kerry has a stellar record, both in his personal achievments and his voting record in the senate. But what I see when I watch the man is not what I would expect from his record. I think we need a candidate who can convince America that democratic values are American values. We need a candidate who can rally Americans behind the ideals of peace, prosperity, equality, fairness, justice, evnironmental sensitivity and and optimism.

On paper, it seems like Kerry should be the guy. In practice however, he falls short. He seems dispassionate about democratic ideals and more concerned with playing in Rove's poop-filled sandbox.

[Virgil]

19. Kerry is a sellout

Kerry is all about Kerry the way all the other Congressmen sellout just to stay in office. He headed the Kerry Commission that investigated the Iran Contra dealings and when they had direct testimony that the CIA was bringing cocaine into this country, he just buried it. A person can go to jail a long time for having a little cocaine, and the USG can fly tons of it in and sell it and nobody does anything.

The whole thing about prohibition is to drive the price up of these addictive substances. And the CIA operates on its own funds that it generates and not one penny in appropriations from Congress. Now how do you think they get all that money for their robotic rocket planes and all the other toys? FromtheWilderness.com says the CIA launders $200 billion a year in drug money. Prohibition is all about keeping the prices high and controlling the flow of money. The US has imposed a civil war on Colombia- http://www.narconews.com/Issue31/article886.html

To be short, Kerry could have blown the lid off the farce they call the Drug Wars and didn't. He sold out and played the game all these years. He is a traitor much less not being worthy of being president.

[jjmalonejr]

30. Where do you see him falling short?

I don't get it. Where is he not behind the ideals of peace, prosperity, equality, fairness, justice, environmental sensitivity and optimism? Have you reviewed his record? Have you listened to his campaign themes?

Remember, this is IWR aside, which we HAVE to stop arguing about (Wes Clark is SO right about that).

[HFishbine]

37. On the campaign trail

Is he inspiring democrats to their high ideals? Is he talking about peace and prosperity?

Yes, I've reviewed his record and that is exactly my point. What I hear does not match his record. What I hear is him hounding Dean to "Answer the question. Answer the question," and casting other aspersions direct and subtle against other candidates.

John Kerry would take a 5 point jump in the polls if on one debate, or one "Harball" or one MTP, he would talk about nothing but his ideals and how they fit with America; his belief in equality, fairness and hope. Don't tell me again to look at his record. That's not enough when his rehtoric is about something else. I want to hear positive, uplifiting and inspiring words out of his mouth.

[jjmalonejr]

48. Now we're talking...

Yes, he is talking about peace and prosperity. They all are. That's not what this is about.

I agree with you that his campaign has not inspired Democrats the way Dean's has, but I think that has more to do with Dean's successfully misrepresenting his own record and characterizing himself as the liberal in the race (which is absurd, but apparently working).

I also agree with you that decisions to confront Dean with "Answer the question, governor?" and stuff like that make Kerry come off badly, but frankly I think that Kerry (and myself) are frankly baffled by how a fairly moderate to conservative Democratic governor has created this myth about himself simply by making a lot of noise, while a guy who has spent a lifetime fighting for liberal Democratic values is getting the shaft.

[sandnsea]

55. 99% of the time, he does

Here's a whole list of speeches and articles where he does just that. He speaks 5,000 words on peace and prosperity, says 5 words on his differences with Dean and the media reports the 5 words. These articles are nothing but his vision.

http://www.cfr.org/campaign2004/bio_kerry.php

[HFishbine]

77. Geez! Does he really need advice from me?

Two points:

1) If it's the media's fault that all they pick up on is Kerry's "Dean, Dean, Dean" comments, then he'd be wise to strike the word from his vocabulary. Don't give them any fodder. Through sheer force of will, make the message 100% about a better future for America.

2) When the camera is in his face for 60 seconds during a nationaly televised debate, that is the time for the hopeful message. Period. No distratctions, no policy lingo, no digressions, no defensive prefaces, no focus on anything but a vision of a better America under president Kerry. When his face is filling my screen, when he has my undivided attention that is when I should be hearing his best and strongest message. Talk to me Kerry.

[jjmalonejr]

85. Apparently he does

I agree with you that he needs to do a better job of distilling his message into sound bytes and performing better in the 60 seconds he's limited to on television.

I also agree with you that he should not focus on Howard Dean, but I wonder why the media tends to focus on Kerry's statements about Dean and not report on Dean's misrepresentations of his record themselves? That's what I think the Kerry campaign finds frustrating.

NH comes up very soon, and expectations are high for Kerry there. If the media don't focus on Dean's self-perpetuated myth soon, he'll win there and Kerry will be in big trouble.

[sandnsea]

86. He is

I can hear it. I don't know why you can't hear it. Maybe you just don't want to. I don't know.

[HFishbine]

101. I just reviewed the transcripts of the last debate

And I have to say, he really did do a much better job than in previous debates.

I was sharing my impression, one that I think a lot of people have. However, it is clear that, in the last debate at least -- and putting aside Koppel's inane questions about Dean, that Kerry is speaking against George W and for things that will make America better. If he can stay focused on those things -- like a laser, his message might start to get through.

[sandnsea]

110. He always has

For example, he believes in keeping the middle class tax cuts. But any time he mentions it, with or without Gephardt or Dean's name, it's reported in the media as an attack on Dean. He can't say anything without it being reported as an attack on Dean. The other candidates have the same thing going on. The media is stirring up the bulk of this, it sells.

In a normal campaign, pointing out the differences between taxes, NRA, affirmative action, and foreign policy would be normal. This year, it's, "he's bashing Dean". No matter which candidate tries to point out their differences.

[HFishbine]

163. Our exchange

I appreciate the civil discussion we've had here. Kerry has always been one of my "top-tier" candidates. If he gets the nomination, I'll campaign my ass off for him.

[dfong63]

90. we don't and won't

Remember, this is IWR aside, which we HAVE to stop arguing about (Wes Clark is SO right about that).

this is still a democracy, and "we" don't "have" to stop arguing about it, and won't. of course it would make sense that a waffler like Clark would like us to forget about an issue that showed him at his worst. tough luck. we're not going to "get over" the coup 2000, and we're not going to give Clark or Kerry a pass on their words and deeds in the leadup to this illegal and immoral war.

[sandnsea]

99. Voting Kucinich???

And please post the link for the speech where Kerry said to get over it because I've never seen it in context.

We aren't going to win next year by rehashing Florida. I suspect that's all he was saying. We have to put that behind us, get up and fight back and show them we're better and deserve to win.

[Dover]

119. They should have fully investigated and dealt with the illegalities of

the Florida debacle right away if they wanted them to "go away". Now they are still unresolved heading into elections, which is causing heightened distrust of the voting system and their machines. And rightly so.

Not one Democratic candidate (besides Kucinich) has ever even raised the issue to my knowledge.

And the War Vote hasn't gone away because it is and was a litmus test for each and every Democrat, and Kerry has failed to explain himself in a way that would make it go away. The reason, I suppose, is that he can't.

Leadership is defined by such moments...when it really counts. Can one "do the right thing" when it counts most?...because it is in those critical moments when the full measure of a person is revealed.

And what is worse (not just from Kerry) is the complete lack of recognition by the Democratic leadership of the ground swell of protest and avalanche of letters and phone calls received by them from THEIR CONSTITUENCY opposing the war, and their signatures on the Resolution. They didn't bring the people into that decision at all it seemed. Where is the democracy they give lip service to? And now those angry citizens are letting them know they will NOT be ignored and they will NOT forget.

[bearfartinthewoods]

136. if we continue to look back at the last election we cannot focus on the

future. honestly, which is more important to you? how bush got into the white house or how we get him out?

[Dover]

142. I'm concerned about how he might get into the White House AGAIN

via the same route, because no one has challenged it.

I'm also wondering what the real reasons were for the Democratic leadership's stance on Bush's War (I don't buy that they were hoodwinked by Bush's promises). I want to know because I want to understand who has been and might continue to see our involvement in Iraq as an acceptable thing. Clearly there is confusion about just why they seemed so cozy with Bush and his policies....which is why so many have turned away from "insiders".

[sandnsea]

144. They did

Yes, the candidates have mentioned the voting machines, in Florida. Kucinich took the boldest stand, I agree, but the others have taken it on.

The DNC did comment on Florida. Funny nobody noticed because it wasn't on the teevee. http://www.spinsanity.org/posts/200106-3.html Kerry introduced legislation to make voting a holiday, which is more than any of the other wonderful Democrats did. And investigations did happen and there were favorable outcomes for the disenfranchised; funny nobody knows that because it wasn't on the teevee either.

The war vote is only a litmus test for Kerry. I know that because of the support for Hillary who was much more pro-war; and the relative support of Edwards as VP. There was no warnings by Hillary or any other negative comments about Bush's actions from her. Kerry was consistently concerned and wrote and spoke about it, but it wasn't reported on the teevee so nobody knows. The vote itself reflected the thinking of the majority of Americans at the time, a threat was necessary to get inspectors back in. Kucinich wanted inspectors back in too, he just thought we could continue diplomacy which hadn't worked for 4 years, but he wanted to keep trying.

A large number of protestors does not make that group the constituency a representative MUST listen to. There are other constituents to consider as well, if you want to talk about democratic represenatation.

I believe Kerry made that vote based on his conscience and his consistent concern about Saddam Hussein, which is documented and goes back to 1997. The full measure of Kerry is that he could easily hav voted no to please the liberal base, but he didn't because he thought dealing with Iraq was more important. He stood for what he believed. What Bush did with that vote is the crime and I wish people would focus on Bush's crime so we could get him out.

[MoonRiver]

9. Nothing. That's it.

But voting to give a power crazed moron the ability to wage an immoral and unjust war, which, "incidentally" has killed hundreds of thousands, and violates international law, is a pretty big one. I'd vote for him if he miraculously got the nomination, but it doesn't look like I'll be faced with that moral dilemma.

[tridim]

10. Skull and Bones

and everything associated with it. He seems like a decent guy otherwise. If it weren't for Dean, I'd probably back someone like Kerry. Kerryclarkucinich has been my second place candidate for awhile.

[Philosophy]

164. I agree

You have to wonder where his loyalties really lie.

[kodi]

11. nothing, nothing at all. he'd make a good president

but running for president requires a different set of skills than actually being president.

and kerry has not shown the skills to do the former.

bill clinton said it well: running for president is poetry, being president is prose.

kerry is lousy at poetry, that's all.

[KaraokeKarlton]

12. Here's why I don't like him...

1) He has made a habit of lying about Vermont and Governor Dean. I am a Vermonter and this is something I have no use for.

2) He wants to force kids to do Community Service in order to get a diploma. I think this is inherently wrong and I oppose it very strongly. This is no different than forcing those who receive welfare to work, but at least they would get compensation for it. And minors don't even get to vote, which adds to how wrong this is.

3) I think Kerry is stagnant as a politician. Although his IWR vote isn't one of the reasons I don't like him, the fact that he has been casting his votes based on whether it's a "safe" vote or not tells me that he's more of a follower than a leader. That's not saying he hasn't done some good things, only that I have no confidence in him standing up for what's right before it's "politically safe" to do so.

4) He's so hung up on attacking Dean that he lost any message that he had. His campaign really sucks and he seems more hung up on image than anything else.

These are the reasons that come to mind.


As for the follow up question...no, I don't think Kerry would make an outstanding president. He'd be better than Bush, but far from outstanding. I think he'd be "ok", but nothing more. I just think he's stagnant as a politician, and that's why I believe he would be mediocre at best.

[sistersofmercy]

25. What's wrong with mandatory community service?

All the private schools here in St Louis require this, religious and secular. I think it instills a responsibility to community, to follow human beings, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[incontrovertible]

36. Not a fan of government-mandated charity

How is it any different than government-mandated adherance to Christian morality? "We won't force you to accept our beliefs - only to behave as if you accepted them."

Community service should not become the equivalent of a Defensive Driving course. I think its mandate would cause a lot more harm than help.

[sistersofmercy]

70. I fail to see how any harm could arise from mandatory community

service as long as the youths are free to choose which community service to participate in. If you mean to imply charity is only a Christian attitude, I beg to differ, all major religions list charity towards those less fortunate as a component of basic principles and there exist many charitable foundations with no religious affiliation.
I believe such participation would further a sense of belonging to community and I just don't see the harm in that.

[JohnKleeb]

38. on community service

I was under the impression it already was mandatory. Like I gotta do a certain amount next year.

[JVS]

69. Did you get arrested or something

I'm an American damnit and the best thing about being an American is that I don't have to do shit!

[KaraokeKarlton]

41. I can't believe you have to ask what's wrong with it

n/t

[sandnsea]

75. Rutland High School???

They have it.

http://www.state.vt.us/stw/stwbpmlorutlandyes.html

[KaraokeKarlton]

81. I don't live in Rutland

and if my kids' school were to take on that policy I would move them into another school or homeschool instead. I am THAT opposed to it.

I'm going to have to check on Rutland's program and check their drop out statistics. There are a lot of teenagers on the edge of dropping out anyway, and this will just give them another reason to consider it. Forced labor without financial compensation is a violation of a child's human rights. Forced community service is punitive in nature and wrong.

[sistersofmercy]

96. You honestly think community service would raise drop out rates?

Public schools with community service here have the lowest drop out rates. You need to expound further on the concept of community service being punitive. One could argue school in general school is forced labor without compensation.

[KaraokeKarlton]

100. Rutland High School is below the state average

on graduation rate.

Kids already "earn" their diploma by studying and doing their homework. Making them do community service in order to get what their academic work is already earning is wrong. Community service is punitive because that's what people who break the law have to do to repay society for what they did wrong. Volunteer work is a wonderful and fulfilling thing, and it is VOLUNTARY. As soon as it is forced it ceases to become voluntary and becomes punitive.

There are teenagers who are at risk to drop out because they are already struggling to succeed and are having a hard time meeting the requirements they already have. To add more requirements to these kids is just asking for trouble. It's wrong and I will NEVER support it.

[sistersofmercy]

130. So do drop outs who don't "earn" their diplomas have cause for

recourse against the system for forced labor without compensation? So community service is punitve because you say so based on that fact that courts assign community service as repaying a debt to society by lawbreakers? I have no doubt that some students would grumble and strongly dislike having to leave their tv or nintendo and likewise there will be parents who agree their children should not have help society in any way, shape or form and liken it as forced labor without compensation or some other ridiculous assertion. On the flipside, I am quite sure there would be students who would not otherwise participate in such programs who would find it greatly rewarding.
Clearly, we are not going to agree on this subject, I am incapable of understanding how community service, no matter the form it takes, is a bad thing.

[KaraokeKarlton]

94. Just as I suspected

Rutland also has one of the lowest graduation rate in the state.

http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/html/data/graduation_00.html

[sistersofmercy]

109. There are many contributing factors for drop out rates

to assume mandatory community service is one of them is erroneous. You would need to do a longitudinal analysis of drop out rates and determine an increase or decrease after the implementation of such a program and whether there are other contributing factors. Again, one of the private secular schools here in St Louis has mandatory community service, the youths can choose which community service to participate in and the school has a zero drop out rate. There have been cases where students have been expelled from the school because of conduct, in fact, there's a case right now.
As I stated above in a previous post, public scools in the area with mandatory community service have much lower drop out rates than others that don't. Is it a reason for lower drop out rates I hardly think it is a main factor because there are many influences. But in general I just believe it to be a positive influence for the students.

[sandnsea]

111. Service builds self esteem

Perhaps part of the solution is giving these kids a sense of value and importance in society. Helping them find their talents. Making them feel like they're "part of" instead of "apart from". I bet that school will turn around in the long run if they're supported in the classroom at the same time.

[KaraokeKarlton]

122. If service builds self esteem

Then why don't Democrats support forcing people on welfare to do community service? Afterall, you are claiming that forced community service is such a great thing for a person. I guess you support forcing people on welfare to have to work in order to get any benefits as well then.

[sandnsea]

145. They do have to

They have to be involved in education, work program or actually work in libraries, food banks, etc. That's part of welfare to work.

[sistersofmercy]

80. What a persuasive argument, care to offer any specifics?

[JVS]

51. Go get me a beer and I'll tell you

[sandnsea]

73. It will be up to the school board

It's a Civics Class the local community can implement or not. Totally up to the local community. If they choose to, there will be federal funding available. Lots of states and local communities already have this and like it. If you don't want it, don't let your local school board implement it. Actually, Vermont has schools with service learning implemented already, Rutland High School is one.

http://www.state.vt.us/stw/exemplarybpintro.html

[ldoolin]

92. Here's what's wrong with mandatory service

Amendment XIII

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

[jjmalonejr]

40. Where are these SAFE votes you're talking about?

Again, aside from the IWR.

Sounds to me that you don't like Kerry because he is telling the TRUTH about Howard Dean's record and you don't want to hear it.

Check your facts. Kerry has been a ROCK STAR for Democratic values his whole career, and does not back down from a fight.

[KaraokeKarlton]

53. No, he hasn't been telling the truth about Dean's record

And I am definitely in a position to know since I'm living under his record every day.

No child left behind, tax cuts, Patriot Act for starters, beside IWR.

This carries over in what he does and says as well. He is a typical poll watcher and does what seems politically safe.

As for "facts", I said he's done some good things, and I also said I don't like him and spelled out very clear reasons why I don't like him. You can like him and I'm not telling you that you are wrong for liking him, so kindly refrain from telling me that I'm wrong for not liking him. It's about personal preferences, and I don't prefer Kerry for the reasons I've stated.

[jjmalonejr]

64. Hold Up!

I never said you were wrong for not liking him, I asked you a question about the safe votes, which you answered.

What are the lies that Kerry is telling about Dean's record?

[KaraokeKarlton]

76. The first one was in the first debate

When he told a blatant lie about Dr. Dynasaur.
He claimed that Dean is against Medicare when Dean has consistently testified in front of Congress to fix what's wrong with the program and make it better.
He used tax break figures from an upper middle class tax bracket to mislead people into thinking lower middle class people would lose a much larger amount of money than they actually would.

There have been more, but those are the first ones that come to mind.

[in_cog_ni_to]

59. I had completely forgot about----->

2) He wants to force kids to do Community Service in order to get a diploma. I think this is inherently wrong and I oppose it very strongly. This is no different than forcing those who receive welfare to work, but at least they would get compensation for it. And minors don't even get to vote, which adds to how wrong this is.
That's one more reason to add to the list. Thanks for the reminder.

[liberalmuse]

13. No beef, really.

He's just not my first choice. Granted, he was 3 years ago for a brief moment in time, but things have changed--namely, we've gotten candidates who are willing to speak out loud, clear and concise against Bush's policies. Kerry has come out against some of Bush's policies, too, and I respect that. I just wish he would come out more strongly against Bush. The truth is, I can't get excited about him, but believe you me, if he wins the nomination, I'll whip up some excitement because he will be our hope against Bush. I also should add that the e-mails I'm getting from the Kerry campaign tend to bash other candidates. I don't need anymore negativity. I've been bogged down in it since Bush took office. Any candidate who is willing to highlight what is wrong with Bush policy, but then offers hope and positive solutions to how we are going to fix this mess is going to get my attention.

[Sliverofhope]

18. I agree basically

Kerry has some strong cards, ie Rand Beers and such... if he were to take some risky, bold moves, he could perhaps uptick. Otherwise I pretty much think he will not make it to the final round. Every candidate has some good cards to play, and Kerry needs to play his.

See:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=895738

[sandnsea]

28. Not mine

The only "bashing" has been 2 articles about Dean's anti-war bullshit. Otherwise, this is what's been in my email since 12/5:

Corporate Responsibility
Kerry Fights For kids
Mark Shearer endorsement
International Human Rights Day
League of Conservation Voters Record
Security & Veterans
Jobs
Freedom to Innovate
Joining the Online Finance Committee
End the Era of Ashcroft
Affordable Health Care

[helleborient]

16. Basically, outstanding Presidents don't alienate others by

Using inappropriate public speaking language...most elderly people in my area find the language completely inappropriate and uncivil regardless of whose mouth it is coming out of.

Also, great Presidents quickly disavow connections with the type of smear ad being run in South Carolina invoking fear of Osama Bin Laden to smear Dean.

I have serious serious questions of the competency of a Kerry presidency in relating to ordinary people and inspiring a message of hope.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

63. look at your OWN house before making disparaging remarks about others

I hate to say it but I know of two elderly ladies who were "leaning Dean" who were really ticked about the language that was used by the comedians and other Dean supporters at that fundraiser.

I realize that Dean himself did NOT make the comments and sometimes it's tough to conrol what your supporters do and say BUT I believe that the "angry and bullying" sort of campaign that Dean is running does generate this sort of thing. I really can't imagine this happening in the Clark, Edwards, Gephardt campagins because they are pretty "genteel" candidates.

In addition, when you work on a campaign you have to be sure that anyone who is speaking on your behalf and on the podium knows not to use profanity or use "hate" language. THAT is "advance" work politics 101. You check out anyone who goes up on that podium and speaks.

I'm working on the Clark campaign and I have to say that the Kerry people have been the most pleasant, polite and cooperative people out of all of the opposing campaigns.

It was stupid of Kerry to use that sort of language but let's not forget that Kerry is an ex-soldier and lets face it - many ex-military people have the habit of having "potty mouths." My father (who was in the Navy in WW II) doesn't go in for a lot of coarse language most of the time - but every once in a while he forgets himself and lets out a few choice words.

[Fleshdancer]

17. I have no beef with Kerry

I just prefer Howard Dean. My original choice waaaay back when was Kerry and if he wins the primaries, I'll fight long and hard for the man. He would definately be an improvement from the guy currently sleeping in the White House.

[bloom]

20. I would like to give him

the benefit of the doubt -

but the few times I've seen him speak have not left me with a favorable impression.

He's gone along with Bush too much.


And there was that debate where he was staying in Washington because of the Medicare vote but participating in the debate - then didn't vote, anyway??? :wtf:



It's things like that.

These are not even the things he did last year or whenever that are irritating. It is right now. And sure people can say - well his vote didn't matter, anyway. But it gives me the impression of his not using his position to stand up for the important things. So why would I vote for him?

[jjmalonejr]

35. Aside from the IWR, where has he gone along with Bush too much???

[Bandit]

61. How about his wanting to appoint Jim Baker

Also his "Get Over It" comment. It goes to show he is out of touch with the base. Granted the base is not middle America but it is "The Base" and he should at least acknowlege their concerns. It was a huge affront to suggest he would appoint James Baker for Iraq envoy. Bush* did just that so it is a popular idea among Republicans. IMHO he is out of touch. Been inside the bubble too long.

[sandnsea]

113. He never said that

People don't even know what he says. They just pick up something and run with it to beat the hell out of him. I think this thread so proves that.

Anyway, Kerry mentioned SEVERAL names as possibilities for an Israel/Palestine peace envoy. NONE from the current administration. The point was obvious to anyone who actually listened to the speech. There is NOONE from this administration qualified to bring peace to Israel/Palestine. In addition, his point was mostly that we need to stop starting over from scratch with each new administration and use the knowledge and relationships built in the past. If we don't start doing that, even in a bipartisan manner with people like Carter and Skowcroft, we'll never get anywhere.

I've asked for a link to the speech where he said "get over it" and I've never gotten it. There is absolutely no context for it, yet people are happy to drag it out and beat him over the head with it.

People want to hate him and are ready to find any excuse to do that.

[Scott Lee]

124. Nice end run around the truth there.

The FACT is that Kerry proposed Jim Baker III as a good choice for MidEast diplomacy. Yes, the same antisemitic creep who also advocated "bombing the hell" out of Arabs.

Sorry Kerry folks, but you're stuck with that one.

[MoonRiver]

128. Also the same Baker who was spewing his pro-* venom during 2000 Selection

nonstop on CNN. :puke:

[HFishbine]

140. Didn't say what?

""Stop crying in your teacups," he told an audience in response to outcries about the stolen election of 2000. "Get over it!"

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/10_kerry.html

OR

"There are a number of uniquely qualified Americans among whom I would consider appointing, including President Carter, former Secretary of State James Baker..."

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1203a.html

Now, which is it he didn't say?

[sandnsea]

162. Read the post

It said send Jim Baker to Iraq. Kerry never said that.

I also said, read words IN CONTEXT. I've never seen the teacups remark IN CONTEXT. I have absolutely no idea what he meant by them, only somebody's interpretation of what was meant. And no, I don't trust Buzzflash as the ultimate authority. Everybody has their prejudices and motives.

I did actually HEAR the speech with Jim Baker mentioned. So I understand exactly what he was saying in regards to continuing with previous successes. More importantly, I also understand the jab to this Administration that the name Jim Baker evoked. Notice what Wolfowitz did when Baker was called up. Tried to sabatoge him. The neocons hate him. I get it. It's sad people don't see the way Kerry operates. It's very smooth, it's diplomatic, it's what we really need with the damage Bush has caused around the world.

[bloom]

65. One of my main problems with Bush

is his weakening of our Constitutional rights.

Kerry went along with it. He didn't have to.



Key Vote

Anti-Terrorism-Passage


Bill Number: S1510
Issue: National Security Issues
Date: 10/11/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Daschle D-SD

Roll Call Number: 0302
Passed

Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists.

S1510 Uniting and Strengthening America (USA) Act of 2001

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists. The bill would allow disclosure of wiretap information among certain government officials, authorize limited disclosure of secret grand jury information to certain government officials, and authorize the attorney general to detain foreigners he suspects are tied to terrorism. It also would make it easier for law enforcement to track Internet communications using surveillance techniques.
(Bill sponsored by Daschle D-SD)

Bill passed 96-1: R 46-0; D 49-1; I 1-0 on 10/11/2001.

Bill Number: S 1510-107th Congress (2001-2002)
Senate Passage Vote: 10/11/2001-Outcome:Passed




Key Vote

Anti-Terrorism-Passage


Bill Number: S1510
Issue: National Security Issues
Date: 10/11/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Daschle D-SD

Roll Call Number: 0302
Passed

Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists.

S1510 Uniting and Strengthening America (USA) Act of 2001

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists. The bill would allow disclosure of wiretap information among certain government officials, authorize limited disclosure of secret grand jury information to certain government officials, and authorize the attorney general to detain foreigners he suspects are tied to terrorism. It also would make it easier for law enforcement to track Internet communications using surveillance techniques.
(Bill sponsored by Daschle D-SD)
Bill passed 96-1: R 46-0; D 49-1; I 1-0 on 10/11/2001.

Bill Number: S 1510-107th Congress (2001-2002)
Senate Passage Vote: 10/11/2001-Outcome:Passed




Key Vote

Anti-Terrorism Authority-Passage


Bill Number: HR 3162
Issue: National Security Issues
Date: 10/25/2001
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Sensenbrenner R-WI

Roll Call Number: 0313
Passed

Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists.

HR 3162 Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001

Vote to pass a bill that would expand law enforcement's power to investigate suspected terrorists. The bill would allow disclosure of wiretap information among certain government officials, authorize limited disclosure of secret grand jury information to certain government officials, and authorize the attorney general to detain foreigners he suspects are tied to terrorism. It also would make it easier for law enforcement to track voice and Internet communications using surveillance techniques and would strengthen laws to combat money laundering. Most of the bill's intelligence-gathering provisions would sunset after four years.
(Bill sponsored by Sensenbrenner R-WI)
Bill passed (thus cleared for the president) 98-1: R 49-0; D 48-1; I 1-0 on 10/25/2001.

Bill Number: HR 3162-107th Congress (2001-2002)
House Passage Vote: 10/24/2001-Outcome:Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 10/25/2001-Outcome:Passed
Presidential Action: 10/26/2001-Outcome:Passed

For further status information, call the Voter's Research Hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART (1-888-868-3762)

[sandnsea]

137. Yep, he's fighting terrorism

He has been since 1989 when he began investigating drugs/guns/money laundering and their connection to terrorism. He fights weapons proliferation too. Then people turn around and say the war vote was just political expedience.

He recognizes laws have been abused and has introduced legislation to fix it. Ashcroft has used alot of laws irresponsibly, the whole Administration has.

[sujan]

21. Does he own my vote?

No!

[jjmalonejr]

33. Why not?

The question was: What is your beef besides the IWR?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

22. Hell yes, he's make a GREAT President. He's done more for the

Dem Party than any of the other candidates. He also has a better chance to win than most of the other candidates except Clark. I look at his chances as equal to those of Gephardt and Edwards. Dean used to be my favorite but the more I learn about him - the less I feel that he can win against Bush.

[alcuno]

23. I have several pet peeves.

1. He has too much hair. A man that age should not have that much hair. I have a similar issue with the color of Gephardt's hair.

2. It seems as if he starts most sentences with the words "I believe..." It reminds me of Natalie Wood in "The Miracle on 34th Street" and she always bugged me.

3. He has...a very unnatural cadence...to his speech. It... bugs me. I believe...that he...should stop it.


I don't need an outstanding president. At this point, mildly competent will suffice. I'm sure he would be that.

[msmcghee]

24. No beef, just worried.

First, I want the nomination to go to the guy who can beat Bush*. Period. I'm not sure who that is yet.

I'd like it to be Kerry. I find him very appealing on many levels.

His best assett - re: beating Bush* is his great legislative record and his foreign policy / war experience.

His one drawback that I can see - is I sense that he may be a turn off to the southern white male types who many see we need to appeal to. I can see where those guys might see him as a bit "prissy" in an eastern establishment kind of way.

However, that is exactly what appeals to me. He is very smart and his courage has been proven. He has no need to appear macho in his demeanor. He has the real stuff. The question is, will southern white males see that John Kerry - or will they see that other whimpy elitist guy that knows a lot of big words - the one that Bush* is sure to jump on if he get's the nomination?

Having grown up in the south I'm worried.

[jjmalonejr]

32. Would a southern VP ease your worries?

I think a Kerry/Edwards ticket is a winner.

[msmcghee]

43. Yes

It would ease them - but not eliminate them.

[jjmalonejr]

50. I get that.

Who do you like at the top of the ticket, then?

[msmcghee]

88. As I said, I prefer Kerry.

When I think of who I would be happiest with as president, who I think could best represent true American values (my values of course), who has the experience to turn our nation back onto the right track (without alienating everyone on the right), etc. it's John Kerry.

But I am reluctant to hope too hard that my dreams be answered - if that means we lose for political and image problems that I don't understand as well as the pros. I have heard knowledgeable people say that Kerry has that weakness.

There's so much at stake - and so many unknowns. Maybe I worry too much and I should just go all-out for my guy - and hope it all works out somehow. But I'm more likely to wring my hands until the day the election is over - no matter how good it looks for us along the way.

That's why I'd be a really terrible leader/politician. ;-)

[sandnsea]

58. Veterans like Kerry

They know he's been in their corner for years and they will rally behind him. As will the firefighters. He has alot of plusses in that area which will overcome any of that elitist crap, which he isn't anyway.

[msmcghee]

98. Thanks

I like hearing that.

[kcwayne]

26. He never had the courage to stand up to the right wing

Kerry appeased the junta, and stood silent while they took liberties with the Constitution, lied us into war, and unleashed a massive propaganda machine that calls all of those that disagree with them traitors.

It wasn't until other voices, such as Dean and Kucinich started calling Bush a liar that Kerry lifted his head from the fox hole and realized that you could challenge the administration. That is not leadership.

I don't think he would make a good president. I don't think he could inspire most Americans because he comes off as aloof and a crowd follower.

[zulchzulu]

29. Iran Contra hearings, BCCI scandal hearings, Rove investigations?

You surely don't know your stuff.

[sandnsea]

31. Screaming counts, not action

That's all I can figure.

[kcwayne]

146. Effective action counts

Iran contra was a failure. They didn't touch Reagan, Ollie North is elevated to hero status for putting weapons in the hands of people that may very well have used them against us or sold them to people that have. And that doesn't even count the narcotics trading.

Its lucky for Reagan that he didn't do something really treacherous like get a blow job in the oval office.

What I remember about Iran Contra was being in total disbelief that the administration could get away with something so absolutely treasonous and criminal, and all they did was cough up a low level functionary. I frankly don't remember much about Kerry's part in that, but there certainly was no success there that would make him rememberable. If I were Kerry, I wouldn't want to attach my name to my obvious failures.

[w13rd0]

39. Yeah, and Lieberman headed up the Enron investigation...

...and the California Energy rip offs...like so many issues where the Dems could have bared their teeth. And where are these issues at now? These outrages and illegalities. Kerry would likely make an adequate President. But it's not just the IWR that leads me to think he isn't the best choice. It's his being in Congress and the manner in which he's conducted his campaign.

[sendero]

44. again...

..what has he done for me LATELY? Anything more than a few years is ANCIENT HISTORY and it has been totally negated by the politically safe stance he has taken lately.

[kcwayne]

84. I should have been more explicit in the time frame I am addressing

Up until 9/11 I had a very favorable opinion of Kerry, and would have considered him pre 9/11.

But since then Kerry has been nowhere to be seen. At the point in time where I was despairing about the course of our country, to the point that I thought the only option was to leave it because there was no voice, NO VOICE taking on the Christian Taliban warriors taking this country to a place not worthy of living in, Kerry was slient. He failed the test of courage like most of the Democrats.

Kerry has fought the good fight in the past, no question. But this time around, he wilted from the conflict until stronger voices cleared the way. I hold him accountable for that.

[Old and In the Way]

42. He'd make a great President.

He knows where the skeletons are buried and he has the guts to go after them.

IMHO, it matters not which Democrat is elected if we don't regain the House and Senate. Only when we get majorities there can we start cleaning house properly.

[sendero]

62. I keep hearing this...

... "he knows where....has the guts to go"

I ask you one simple question - "what is he waiting for?"

Kerry isn't going after jack squat. He could not even stand up to Bush* on a simple unprecedented blank check war vote.

If Kerry wanted to be a hero he's had plenty of opportunity and where is the result?

[Skittles]

45. before IWR I honestly thought Kerry would BE president

he sold out with that vote.

[dkf]

47. I know this is really shallow but he puts me to sleep.

Boring boring boring and he always says I I I.

Very uninspiring.

Frankly, I haven't been able to listen to him enough to figure out if he'd be a good President.

But I don't see why he wouldn't be ok.

[jjmalonejr]

49. Well, I'm glad you realize it's shallow.

I want to hear more fire, too, but I know it's there.

[msmcghee]

105. Actually his appearances . .

. . in the last two weeks have been great in this regard.

I think intelligent controlled anger is far more effective than Bush*s hollow blather about "evildoers". Only the dumbest voters would not see that.

Unfortunately "the dumbest voters" could number more than 50% of the turnout. I am still totally amazed that people in my country gave Bush* over 20% of the vote.

[AP]

56. Only biography.

I love everything else about him. But, I think biography is the one weak link.

I really think that the ability to connect with the middle and working class on an economic level is going to be very important. The only thing I've heard Kerry say in response to this issue was that he fought in Vietnam side by side with people of all races and classes.

Vietnam was a long time ago, and he was in the armed services for less than a year. It's good, but it's not enough.

[sandnsea]

60. He's leading with the union vote in Iowa

In the Pew poll, I believe. His supporters are closer to Gep's in demographics than Dean's are. And Edwards would do well with these folks too, I'm sure; but don't forget peoples inclinations against trial lawyers these day. That could be just as tough as Kerry's biography. Could be, not saying it would be.

[AP]

78. Remember what Bush did with Gore's biography?

Even if Kerry is leading with unions now, I think his biography would be a problem in the GE.

[sandnsea]

89. Every candidate has to face that

You know what they'll do with the trial lawyer. That's actually one reason I think Clark might be best. It's really hard to seriously beat the hell out of a General.

[AP]

91. They pulled the trial lawyer card on Edwards in 98 to put the nail in...

...the coffin (he was losing when they did that).

It got him ten points in the polls and the win.

Faircloth would be the Senior Senator for NC but for the trial lawyer thing.

Furthermore, I think biography is a CRUCIAL issue. It's not, like, fifth most important. It's like number one or two on the list of critical components for a presidential candidate.

[sandnsea]

97. If it didn't work in NC

That is definitely a PLUS!! Thanks for the info!

[gulliver]

66. He doesn't act dominant.

I think a leader has a certain element of "Yes, I'll listen to you, and I expect you to listen to me." It's presumptuous, even a little pushy. It isn't leadership, per se. It's part of the equation of leadership, a certain comfort with and expectation of being turned to. A readiness to accept the burden of leadership...a confidence in one's ability to bear that burden.

Dean and Clark both have it. Clinton has it. Gore not so much.

Bush has it, so it is clearly not an attribute that is exclusive to the virtuous.

Kerry doesn't have it -- or doesn't show it so much. It comes across as a lack of "fire in the belly." It almost looks like fear of being in over one's head.

That's my take.

[Padraig18]

67. "...Aside From the IWR, What's Your Beef With John Kerry?"

That puts me in mind of the old joke: "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?" :eyes:

I am one of those who was seriously considering supporting Sen. Kerry, up until that vote. The IWR was the question, and he blew the answer; we saw it, we protested, we saw through the tissue of *'s lies, as did *many* Democratic senators. I'm sorry to say this, but I will believe until the day I die that that vote was made with and eye on the White House, and not where it should have been--- the Constitution.

That said, the other answer is 'yes', I believe Sen. Kerry would probably make an excellent President, and if he gains the nomination, I will work my fingers to the bone to make it so.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

68. Only one

and that is conditional. If Kerry had anything to do with the Dean attack ad, I find that inexcusible. If he didn't, I hope they find out who was really behind these ads.

[Paulie]

71. Anyone who ran for President in the 80/90's

Have been around too long. We need change, no more whimpy get along Democrats. More of the same, means another 4 years for the junta.

We need to be starkly different than the republicans. Give people a real choice.

[IndianaGreen]

72. That's it! IWR is the only beef with Kerry!

Kerry will not make an "outstanding" President, and may not even be a "great" President. Kerry's vote on IWR, and his rationale for it, makes me think that Kerry supports a compassionate-PNAC foreign policy agenda.

Any permutation of American imperialism is bad for us and for the world!

[0007]

112. I feel exactly the same way!

[littlejoe]

74. Kerry would be my second choice.

One problem I have, actually two or three problems I have with Kerry are that, number one, as a leading member of the senate, I don't believe he voiced strong enough opposition to Bush's policies when it counted. Number two, I believe he is a fence sitter, and waits to see which way the wind blows, before he jumps one way or the other. Thirdly, I don't believe he has an effective way of connecting with the people. Lastly. and this is purely cosmetic, he looks like a muppet. He can't help it, but I can't help but smile every time I see his face.

[PSR40004]

79. He killed civilians and took a metal for it...

He killed civilians and took a metal for it is my big beef. Not so much that he killed civilians as they were in a war zone and that's another issue (techenically within Army rules) but that he wrote up a report that made it seem something it wasn't and took a metal for it. It shows a lack of charactor IMO.

[WilliamPitt]

87. Are you sure you have the right guy

John Kerry...Bob Kerrey...two different guys.

[sandnsea]

95. Uhm, it's a medal

If you're going to go after a veteran, you might want to at least spell the word right. It helps with credibility and stuff like that.

The only thing Kerry ever got medals for, to my knowledge, was saving the lives of his crew in a very difficult situation. Vietnam wasn't pretty, that's why he came back and fought to stop it. Here's excerpts from the Atlantic Monthly article for more info. I encourage you to read it, not because of John Kerry but to understand the pain of that war.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/clips/news_2003_1119a.html

[IndianaGreen]

103. That was Bob Kerrey, who is now going to the 9/11 Commission

a simple check of the facts by you would have prevented the confusion about the names. Here is an interesting 2002 review about Medal of Honor recipient Bob Kerrey's memoir When I Was a Young Man.

JUNE 11, 2002

MOVEABLE FEAST
By Thane Peterson

Bob Kerrey's American Tragedy

War hero or criminal? His new book provides no easy answers, but it does offer a candid look at a complicated, often pain-filled life

Lots of things are missing from When I Was a Young Man, the new memoir by former Nebraska Democratic Senator and Governor Bob Kerrey, who's now 58. Nothing about his ex-wives, his current wife, his three children, his relationship with movie actress Debra Winger, his successful career as an entrepreneur, his years in government, or the fact that he's now president of the New School University in New York City. This is the story of Kerrey's youth, his family history, his war wounds, and the beginnings of his recovery.

<snip>

...in the end the book is mainly Bob Kerrey's story, and it's one Americans should be thinking about as the nation sends young troops abroad in the war on terrorism.

It hinges on two terrible events during the 50 days Kerrey spent fighting in the Vietnam War. The first is a night in early 1969, when Kerrey led a team of Navy commandos on an aborted raid that left an unknown number of unarmed Vietnamese women and children dead. The second is a firefight a few weeks later in which Kerrey was badly wounded and lost the lower part of his right leg. For his courage during this second incident, Kerrey won the Congressional Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for valor.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jun2002/nf20020611_6203.htm

[oasis]

131. Thanks for the clarification and additional information.

[DFLforever]

82. Mainly the vote

which is symptomatic to me of his fundamental miscalculations of the mood and thinking of the country, especially the Democratic countryside. He should have paid more attention to his constituents - they could have shown him the way.

I also heard he was so tough, such a fighter, he'd really take on Bush, etc., etc. He doesn't appear to have done so. But Dean has.

I don't know whether he'd make a good president or not...but I do think at this point he's been a mediocre candidate.

[Deb]

83. I worry about his ability to judge character

and what type of people he would choose as Presidential advisors. It's a concern I have about all the candidates that voted for the IWR and put their trust in bush to do the right thing. I'm an undecided just now looking at Kerry and open to any info that would change that notion.

[Bandit]

93. You hit the nail squarely on the head

That is my concern also. It was brought to the forefront a few days ago when he said he would appoint James Baker as an envoy. I have huge concerns about his judgement of issues and character.

[Fahrenheit911]

102. em, he voted to give shrubie the power to to war

war is wrong.. simple as that..
never helps anything.. just leads to killing death and misery

[ldoolin]

104. A few things

I'm ABB all the way and would support Kerry if he got the nomination. I think he would make a good President about on par with Bill Clinton, but not an outstanding one.

A few things about him besides his IWR vote bother me:

He talks a good liberal talk but votes like a moderate when bills come up for a vote. The IWR is only one example. Where was he when it was vitally important to oppose the Patriot Act? Only Russ Feingold cast a dissenting vote in the Senate. He voted for NAFTA and the WTO.

I am afraid that if Kerry gets the nomination he will be unelectable, where Dean or Clark would be very electable. The reason? We need to win the swing states, and the swing states will only go Democratic if we have a candidate who voters can be assured isn't going to push for more gun control laws. That's what more than anything else sank Gore in 2000, not just Nader, hanging chads, or the Supreme Court.

Now here's what I like about Kerry:

During the 1980s, Kerry stood almost alone, at first, in making an issue out of the Reagan-Bush ties to Manuel Noriega.

Kerry was a leader in investigating the Iran-Contra scandal and opposing the Reagan policy in Central America.

Kerry has strong anti-war credentials from his past, going back to his involvement with Vietnam Veterans Against the War in the early 1970s.

The problem: All the things that I like about him are from the 1970s and 1980s. That was a long time ago.

[RainDog]

107. I'm vegan about Kerry

don't have a beef, don't see him as chicken(hawkish), don't associate him with congressional pork.

I will say that his explanation for his support of the IWR doesn't help him with me, or with people like those on this forum who seemed to be able to marshall plenty of evidence to doubt both Bush's command of the facts, and to doubt Bush's trustworthiness about using any power to use diplomatic coercion rather than war...the war was, most of all imho, a political move for the mid-term elections.

Bush and Rove playing politics with people's lives, the neo-cons advancing their delusional agenda by expoiting everyone's vulnerability in an election cycle.

but again, unless I totally misunderstood him, my rep told those of us at a townhall meeting in Oct. 03 that Saddam did not have nuclear capability at that time, and wouldn't, and Bush's "imminent threat" from that was, to me, obviously a lie.

WMD are another issue, however. But that, too, seemed to be a lie because Ritter was believable to me, as were the six generals and the diplomats and the cia intel who oppposed the invasion.

what I see as Kerry's biggest problem is his presentation. A woman from the WSJ on Bill Moyers last night said that he comes across as "negative."

Of course, one person's negative is another person's circumspect, but for the rah-rahs in the U.S., Kerry needs to work on his speeches so that he can inspire with a positive alternative to Bush.

This should be easy, since Bush is a failure and a liar across the board, if you look at and expose his policies in every area of executive function other than cheerleading for war and photo ops for a television presidency.

The reason Dean appeals to me is that he comes across as a postive and energetic alternative to the repuke b.s. which they couch in rah-rah lies.

When I recently saw Kerry's wife on c-span, she also did not come across well...her reticence could be misinterpreted.

Real or not, you don't get the feeling that they are comfortable pressing flesh in a campaign, while you do get that feeling with Dean.

Of course, Bush can fake that feeling as long as he only appears in controlled settings with troops on a locked down military facility...which is something Kerry should note over and over again...

why can't Bush even go out in public?? why is the media distorting his support among the American people?

what all dems need to keep in mind is that half the U.S. population did not vote for Bush, and at least that has the common sense to see that Bush, once 9-11 and the shock of that had passed, has the sense to see that Bush is not running this country well.

Bush can and should be painted as a threat to national security, in fact, based upon his policies.

don't let the repukes continue to stage-manage Bush without challenging that EVERY SINGLE DAY.

challenge the press, but don't do a Kucinich, because then they will, of course, be defensive.

but attack Bush as attacking the press....why does he use his position to try to threaten the press if they have questions about his policies and actions?

[RainDog]

141. and on this board...

the biggest issue which alienates me from Kerry's campaign, or Clark's for that matter, is the way in which their supporters present their candidate as the only hope, and Dean as the anti-christ.

...I lean toward Dean, but am not a "deaniac" or anything of the sort. As I mentioned, Dean appeals to my need to have a voice for my frustration with the direction Bush has taken this country,
AND with dems' failure to present an opposition with some bite.

I realize that deaniacs engage in the same sorts of arguments, and that some accuse Kerry of mysterious devil worship proclivities...these also annoy me beyond measure.

I think this is why I've never been immersed in primary politics.

The infighting that is part of the process is sad, to me, when the real opposition is Bush, and when Bush is such a dangerous man to be in control of this country at this time...

not to mention the repuke controlled congress which is working even harder to gerrymander their way into control of this nation, even though the candidates they put forward would be considered extremists by most people in this country.

[ozone_man]

114. Washington insider,

part of the problem, not the solution. OK, I can't mention the IWR, but how about No Child Left Behind? How did he vote on that?

Don't like that he was part of Skull and Bones as was Bush. Dean went to Yale and stayed out of fraternities (I don't care for frat boys). Think he looks only partially alive. He did a great job during Iran/Contra and deserves much credit for that.

He could make a decent president.

[ozone_man]

165. Opinion from Molly Ivins.

"Having concluded that this was the year to Be Sensible, look for a winner, find a moderate, and all that good stuff the expert political players do, I carefully studied the conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom -- the avatar of all political knowledge, the Washington, D.C., press corps -- said John Kerry was the man. So despite his resemblance to the finer products of the taxidermist's art, I sat around waiting for him to show signs of life. And waited."

http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/pe_columnists/article/0,2071,NPDN_14960_2475972,00.html

He just doesn't have the spark to ignite the Democratic Party back to life. Still, he could make a decent president, if he were in the WH. I'm so glad that my paper is including Molly Ivins in the opinion page. She's great.

[frustrated_lefty]

115. His campaign.

He hit the ground and stumbled. As a presumptive front runner, he fell to the middle of the pack. That has nothing to do with policy, but it does say something about his organizational and motivational skills, his ability to delegate authority and choose people to help him get things done. These, to me, are not trivial issues in a presidential election.

I'm also not particularly keen on his attacks on Dean. It occasionally seems he spends more effort on tearing the other guy down than on explaining exactly why he is the best man for the job. I'm sick of listening to crap like that, and we deserve better out of our candidates.

Those, really, are my only objections to Kerry. I would be happy if he won the presidency. I just hope if he does he makes wiser decisions in choosing his cabinet than he did with his campaign.

[killbotfactory]

117. NCLB, tax cuts....

Don't like his pandering to the gun control movement. Don't like his hypocritical attacks on Dean with free trade. Haven't been impressed by him. He seems to talk around difficult questions. There was a few months where every speech or answer to a question mentioned his service in vietnam. Didn't like him bashing Dean as a loose canon for saying he'll take on the Saudi's, and then a month later saying the same thing as Dean. Besides his support of IWR, he supported the war anyway, despite repeatedly saying war must be a last resort, and then admitting Bush rushed to war and we should have given inspectors more time. I don't like him pretending there is no difference between Biden-Lugar and the final IWR. I don't like his justification for voting for IWR. I don't like the way his campaign has been run. I don't like the feeling I get that he and his supporters think he's entitled to the nomination.

But yes, if he managed to do it, he would be a decent president.

[Scott Lee]

120. His support and vote for both Patriot Acts

And no, he would not make an outstanding president. I think his abilities are maxed at the Congressional level.

[dansolo]

121. The IWR is just a symptom

I think that Kerry would make a very good President, but I have the same reservations about him that I had with Clinton. He tends to equivocate on issues for political reasons. The IWR is an example of this. I don't believe for minute that Kerry would have voted for the resolution if he wasn't running for President. Clinton was a great president, but I believe that he sacrificed his principles for political reasons, not out of necessity, but for expediency. That strategy only worked because Clinton had the charisma to pull it off. Kerry doesn't.

[quaker bill]

147. You got it.

Nice post

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

123. I have no beef with him

I opposed the war but I don't hold his IWR vote against him. A lot of people I like and respect voted for it, and after 30+ years in the senate there's a little more to him than that, in my opinion. I think in the months following the war a lot of people were just voting in the way they felt was right, and I believe this to be the case with Kerry. It's too bad this has turned into such a big issue for him, since he brings a lot to the table and certainly deserves a second look.

I guess in all honesty he just kind of leaves me cold. I feel like he hasn't really explicitly made the case for me to vote for him. I'm well aware of his background and what he has going for him, but I don't know that he's translated that into an effective campaign. His message seems kind of "buried" to me, for lack of a better term. I know this may seem superficial, but I think a lot of people out there base their votes on whether they like a candidate personally or not, and while I don't find Kerry off-putting I have a hard time seeing people responding to him on that superficial level which, unfortunately, is a factor in a great many people's decision.

If Kerry was better able to communicate his message I might be a more enthusiatic supporter, but he just comes off as kind of stand-offish. It's not personal and it's not a policy issue, he just seems to be lacking something in the "aura" department.

That all being said, given Kerry's background and experience, I'm sure he would make a great president. If these things were actually decided strictly on issues I think he would be doing a lot better, but unfortunately the contemporary Presidential election is decided on factors that are not quite up to the high standards of those seen on "American Idol."

[Nlighten1]

125. His recommendation of James Bakkker.

His IRW vote, his skipping the vote on Medicare, et hoc genus ohme.

[CalProf]

148. You mean the Medicare bill he skipped the debate to vote against? n/t

[Nlighten1]

159. He didn't vote. nt

[Padraig18]

126. What I notice about the responses is...

... that there are so MANY reasons which mirror my own. It sorta debunks the standard "Kerry is the best candidate we have" mantra, doesn't it? He's a GOOD candidate, but he's FAR from perfect; he has feet of clay just like the other 8 do.

[mzmolly]

127. He wasn't their for US when we needed him in the most important of ways

... But, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat!

[Scott Lee]

135. Indeed. The Entrenched don't make "risky" Congressional votes.

Their number one goal is to keep their powder-puffed asses in a Congressional seat: Principle or morals be damned.

[goodhue]

129. nothing really

he's kinda wooden sometimes
and he doesn't attack corporate interests as strong as he could
and he comes from brahim rather than blue collar background
but other than that I think he's great
although the harley and the battleship kinda make me ill
he is great on the environment!

[Armstead]

132. He'd probably be a decent president, but.....

If he somehow gets it, I'll support him, and he'd be light years better than Bush. He's my Senator, and I really wanted to support him, But...

He has been a bad presidential candidate. The nomination was basically his to lose, and somehow he managed to lose it.

I agree with those who say he has a good record, but much of his gutsiness is in the past. These days he a "more of the same, status quo, play-it-safe corporate Democrat." He's Clinton without the charm. He says so much without really saying anything. He always seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth.

He's also a "day late and a dollar short." We needed guys like him the last three years, and most of them weren't there. Instead they were measuring the wind. AWOL on the theft of America.

I at least respect the fact that Gephardt and Leiberman stuck to their guns on the Iraq War vote. But Kerry really lost it when he gave that speech voting to give Bush unlimited war power, while talking like he was voting against it.



He's too much of a free trader. The mantra that training will overcome the losses of "free trade" is hogwash when the jobs people train for are calso disappearing.

And, on a more shallow level, he is boring as a candidate. Now that Dean has caught fire with populist rhetroric, Kerrry says "F--k" to get the MTV crowd, but that seems so artificial and calculated.

[Room101]

133. My thoughts

Kerry a war hero with medals allowed an AWOL president and a bunch of chicken hawks to define what patriotism was without standing up to them. It was Kerry who was AWOL when we needed him the most. Voting for the patriot act without reading it, I wonder if he would sign a contract without reading it.

I started to really take to Kerry when he said we need regimen change in America then he backed down. When that comment prompted chicken hawks to question his patriotism he should have branded his war medals “ I served my country bravely on the battle field and I will not have my patriotism questioned by people who were too scared to join me” “This administration is radically under the guise of terrorism setting a far right agenda that is eating away at the middle class, dishonoring the victims and families of 911. I’m sure it can be said in more diplomatic ways but you know what I mean.

I’m so fuc*ing sick of Bush using 911 as an excuse for everything. When he is questioned about his policies he replies “we must remember 911” He mentions it when it has nothing to do with a policy he is trying to pass or defend. No one is calling him out about this.

Kerry has tried but failed to get the message across about bush cutting Veterans benefits, he should be bold as a veteran and say “Bush does not support our troops when he cuts their benefits.”

You might be thinking is this simply an emotional loyalty to Dean? Partly, but more importantly this war will have lasting negative and dangerous effects on America for generations to come. Our government has done here what Russia did in Afghanisin spawning a whole new generation of terrorist and a world who despises us.


It is a damn shame I look at Kerry and think about what should have been. If he voted against the patriot act and the IWR he would be my man! He has a more progressive history than Dean but it angers me he went AWOL in this political war. Of course he would make a great president.

[imhotep]

138. a quick summary

He is in politics for himself.
Every decision he makes is for his career.
A great example is his pseudo-"apology" for trusting Bush in a room of liberal reporters. If he was really sorry he would be apologizing to the families of the dead soldiers he sent to die.

[reknewcomer]

143. Don't like his anti-gun attitude

We don't need the draconian MA style gun laws to spread across the country. Vermont has it right and all states should follow Vermont's example.

[quaker bill]

149. It is not IWR it is the political equivocation and lack of judgement

It is the profound lack of judgement involved in "trusting" this President.

We are electing the person who will have the briefcase that contains the trigger for nuclear war. If he could not see through this flimsy charade clearly and know just exactly what he was voting for, then his judgement is too suspect to entrust with this duty.

It is not like people didn't write him and tell him what was up. Further, it is hardly the case that he didn't have enough experience with Shrub* to fill in the blanks on his own.

It was either profoundly poor judgement, or alternately, he supported war on Iraq, thought it was a great idea, and is not comming clean about it now. Either way, I end up supporting someone else.

[realFedUp]

150. He'd be a good president

but my heart and vote are with Dr. Dean.

[Donna Zen]

153. No beef and yes

John Kerry has stood up for liberal causes many times, that we should now become a libertarian support group is beyond my comprehension. Also, Kerry has a chance to win.

Kerry has a broad range of knowledge and experience that would make him a very good president.

On that dark and rainy day, Jan. 20th 2001, it was Kerry who was interviewed and quoted by WP as saying "selected not elected." No other Dem. made an equal statement.

[VT70]

154. I don't have any beef with Kerry

He is high up on my list, behind Gephardt and a couple others. Any of our candidates would be better than Bush. I do think Kerry would make an excellent president.

[frustrated_lefty]

158. Another complaint

His supporters are kinda slow when it comes to addressing criticisms. If you guys want this man in office, you should be all over this thread.

[Jacobin]

160. The IWR, because it cannot be put aside

It will define the foreign policy of this country in a horribly negative way for the next 20 years. Another Vietnam, except this time the people we have further enraged are shooting at us in our own country.

Beside which, in the South and Midwest his attitude is perceived as too condescending and arrogant and reminiscent of Ted Kennedy (who rurals just love to hate, don't ask me to explain it, i can't).

Dean, as a firebrand, and one who does not appear to rurals as coming across in a condescending manner, will appeal to the cross-over voters, IMHO.

I think Kerry might make a good president, but after the IWR, I strongly question his ability to make good decisions in a pinch.

[arwalden]

161. It's Gotta Be The Hair. If He Won't Take Good Advice About Getting...

a new hairstyle and better haircut, then he won't take good advice on anything else. :hi:

-- Allen

[stickdog]

167. He's a boring patrician who has a hard time distilling issues the way

any successful national candidate must in order to communicate to the general US populace.