Looking for a reaction from Kerry

[UnityDem]

on the "compromise". Has anybody seen one?

[wisteria]

1. He might want to read over the compromise first before commenting. n/t

[ginnyinWI]

2. I would check his website tomorrow

He usually puts out statements.

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/press-statement.cfm

[IndianaGreen]

3. He is probably running a poll and a focus group

before he decides which side of the issue to take.

Let's see if he adheres to his previous statement of the nuclear option:

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=237974

[WildEyedLiberal]

4. Cute

Too bad he hasn't disappointed yet. I'm sure you thought he was going to vote for Rice, Gonzales, and Bolton, too.

It's really too bad that he isn't sucking, because then it makes it harder for you to trash him!

But you don't let that stop you. What a good little trooper you are. :eyes:

[Democat]

5. Kerry "hasn't disappointed yet"?

2004 wasn't a dissapointment for you?

[WildEyedLiberal]

6. Yeah that's 100% Kerry's fault

Diebold, Bush voters, MSM whoredom... totally, completely, 100% Kerry's fault. Crucify him! Crucify him!

Wake me up when you've gotten over your bitterness.

[Vektor]

7. GET ME THE SACKCLOTH!

Smear him in ashes!! SKULL AND BOOOOONEZ!

I think I hear the subtle refrain of the siren of an approaching WAAAAHHMBULANCE!

Listen closely. Can you hear it?

:eyes:

[Mass]

8. My disappointement today will be Byrd

Once again, he sold us to corporate interests, as he did for the Bankruptcy Act.

[Skidmore]

9. Byrd was calling for people to rise above it for the

past several weeks. Byrd called for people willing to compromise to work with him. He's a leader.

[Mass]

10. This is a bad deal

These three judges are the exceptional cases the compromise talks of and they are renouncing filibustering them. In the same time, the Republicans who signed the deal are pounding on the Democrats in their TV appearances.

This is not a surprise for me that Byrd is in that as he is fairly conservative, but I will agree with Dorgan and Feingold that this is a bad agreement that will bring nothing as Frist already said he would bring the nuclear option the first time a judge is blocked and that some Republicans have made clear they will not feel beholden to the agreement if they dont consider the judge is extreme.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

17. And if he does, will you eat that post?

[Mass]

11. This was in the BG today

Clearly written before the agreement, but he is giving a clear explaination why we should filibuster bad judges.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/24/fallout_from_nuclear_option/
Fallout from 'nuclear option'

By John F. Kerry | May 24, 2005

THE REPUBLICAN leadership's ''nuclear option" would eliminate the filibuster and turn the Senate into a rubber stamp for even the most controversial of President Bush's judicial nominations. The arguments can seem obscure, but there will be consequences for all of us.

[karynnj]

13. Great editorial

His examples are great. I have followed the debate, but had not connected it to such things as environmental issues - although I heard the list of pro-corporate decisions made by Owens and the almost anti-government statements of Brown.

As with most things Kerry has done since November, everything he's saying here sounds so right. He makes it even harder to get over this country's inexplicable preference for an lying, warmonger idiot over a real, compassionate, brilliant man.

[cestpaspossible]

19. Clearly written before the 'deal'

[Mass]

23. Apparently, he did not change his mind

He voted NO on cloture for Owen , with 17 other senators.

[blondeatlast]

12. Why is he the "go-to" guy all the time? How 'bout Dean,

Kennedy, Boxer, Feingold, ad infinitum?

Why is Kerry the only one who is supposed to comment?

I have my suspicions fo why, but I'll keep them to myself. You are free to speculate on them, however.

[UnityDem]

14. Not only one

I have been scouring web sites to get all kinds of reaction. Just wondered if anybody had seen Kerry's because I value his opinion. Will check his web site.

[AlGore-08.com]

15. Because he's positioning himself to run for President, as are HRC, Bayh

and several others.

Candidates should not be judged just on the issues that they want to promote - - they also should be judged on their roles in the major events of the day, or if they had no direct role, their reaction. No office holder gets to promote their agenda 100% of the time, not even Smirk.

This compromise will affect us all. Part of the deal is that already, three of the judicial nominees that the Dems had said were "unacceptable" are almost certainly going to be confirmed now. These wing nuts are going to make rulings that uphold some of the worst current trends, like United refusing to pay out pensions. And these whacked verdicts will be used as precedents by judges in lower courts.

That's why this compromise is so important. Historically, it's probably as important as some of the compromises about which states were admitted to the union as slave states and which were admitted as free states. And like it or not, Kerry is one of the guys making decisions in the Senate at this extremely important point in history.

No matter what position Kerry takes on the compromise, people have the right to disagree with it, and complain about it - - or they have the right to agree with it, and praise it. That's what we're hear for, after all: to discuss politics.

[TayTay]

16. Kerry not in 'The Mod Squad'

Why does he have to comment on a compromise that is not of his making? I thought he clearly stated his position last week in an excellent floor speech. He didn't want the judges. He didn't want the 'nukular opshun' to fall on the Senate.

That hasn't changed. But he is 1 Senator out of 100. The libs (like him) were outgunned by the Mod Squad. That's the way it goes sometimes. (They are outgunned, you know.) He will probably try to make the best of it. What choice does he have?

[AlGore-08.com]

18. That's one take - - here's one you won't like

This isn't just an adjustment to the 1948 interstate weights and measures act as it applies to the sugar beet industry. This was a historic compromise - - possibly as historic as the compromises that kept the slave/free state balance in the decades leading up to the civil war. Kerry's previous position does not make it clear how he feels about this compromise. It said he doesn't want the judges, but he doesn't want the nuclear option either. But what does he think about this particular compromise? Is it more important to him that the nuclear option was averted, or is it more important to him that these horrible judges will get okayed? How pleased or disappointed is he?

Since Kerry is in office, specifically since he is in the Senate, where this compromise took place, he will have to, as a matter of course, make his position clear to constituents who write or call him about it. He will have to take some position soon. And the longer he waits to come out with some position, the weaker and more political (in a bad way) his argument will appear. That's just the way it is for everybody in office.

[cestpaspossible]

20. He obviously wrote that op-ed before the 'deal'

[karynnj]

21. It is not his decision

The mod squad, as Tay Tay cleverly described the moderates, are the ones who can do something. The remaining Democrats have no ability to filibuster the "accepted" judges on their own - they don't have the votes. They can only work to get more than 50 Senators to vote against each one, which is probably not possible in all cases.

The mod squad Republicans promise to allow Democrats to filibuster the "non-approved" judges without fear of the nuclear option. This agreement seems to give a lot of power to the moderates if they stay together. I'm not sure what the purpose of a Kerry statement would be. (Especially if he feels that giving some power to the moderates might be better than having only the RW have any power - which might be the real alternative. He might make it harder for the moderate Republicans.)

The compromise is probably nowhere near as historic as the slave/free one. As it is it only deals with this group of judges and gives the possibility that the members of this group could filter who gets in and who doesn't by being a swing group. Until this administration, this was closer to the norm where a President always ran the risk of losing the moderate members of his party if he nominated an extreme candidate. It's only the weird circumstances of this administration that makes this more formal.

[demo dutch]

22. I heard Kennedy on NPR saying that the compromise is a good thing!

I bet Kerry feel the same way! This is going to come back to bite them for sure. Extraordinary Circumstances is so vague that we will always lose in the court of public opinion. Plus the repugs with help by the MSM will spin and sway public opinion in their favor.