This guy sure sounds like a Bush-Lite DINO!

[kiahzero]

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040315&s=corn

What's Right With Kerry
David Corn

In the heat of battle, with his campaign crumbling, Howard Dean lashed out at John Kerry. First, he called the leader in the Democratic presidential race a "Republican." Then he said, "When Senator Kerry's record is examined by the public at a more leisurely time...he's going to turn out to be just like George Bush."

Just like George Bush? It is true that Kerry, another Yalie and Skull and Bones alum, has voted in favor of NAFTA and other corporate-friendly trade pacts, that he once raised questions about affirmative action (while still supporting it), that he has, like almost every Democratic senator, accepted contributions from special-interest lobbyists (while being one of the few to eschew political action committee donations), that he voted to grant Bush the authority to invade Iraq. But this hardly makes him Bush lite. There is, as evidence, his nineteen-year Senate record, during which he has voted consistently in favor of abortion rights and environmental policies, opposed Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, led the effort against drilling in the Alaskan wilderness, pushed for higher fuel economy standards, advocated boosting the minimum wage and pressed for global warming remedies. But what distinguishes Kerry's career are key moments when he displayed guts and took tough actions that few colleagues would imitate. One rap on Kerry is that he is overly cautious and conventional. He's no firebrand on the stump, nor does he come across as the most passionate and exciting force for change. But his history in Washington includes episodes in which he demonstrated a willingness to confront hard issues, to challenge power, to pursue values rather than political advantage, to take risks for the public interest.

Kerry arrived in the Senate in 1985. This Vietnam War hero turned antiwar leader had been lieutenant governor of Massachusetts. But he entered the body more as the prosecutor he had been in the late 1970s after graduating from Boston College law school. In early 1986 Kerry's office was contacted by a Vietnam vet who alleged that the support network for the CIA-backed Nicaraguan contras (who were fighting against the socialist Sandinistas in power) was linked to drug traffickers. Kerry doubted that the Reagan Administration, obsessed with supporting the contras, would investigate such charges. He pushed for a Senate inquiry and a year later, as chairman of a Foreign Relations subcommittee, obtained approval to conduct a probe.

It was not an easy ride. Reagan Justice Department officials sought to discredit and stymie his investigation. Republicans dismissed it. One anti-Kerry effort used falsified affidavits to make it seem his staff had bribed witnesses. The Democratic staff of the Senate Iran/contra committee--which showed little interest in the contra drug connection--often refused to cooperate. "They were fighting us tooth and nail," recalls Jack Blum, one of Kerry's investigators. "We had the White House and the CIA against us on one side and our colleagues in the Senate on the other. But Kerry told us, 'Keep going.' He didn't let this stuff faze him."

<snip>

And David Corn is just such a Bush apologist!

:eyes:

[wyldwolf]

1. Here's the deal...

Some people on DU define what a liberal is by IWR and the patriot act.

Every other issue doesn't matter to them.

[kiahzero]

2. If you define "liberal" by the following:

IWR
USA PATRIOT
DOMA

Then Wellstone isn't a liberal (He voted for USA PATRIOT and DOMA).

From the article:
"On September 10, 1996, as he was in a tight re-election contest against William Weld, the popular Republican governor of Massachusetts, Kerry voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which would deny federal benefits to same-sex couples and permit states to not recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states. He was one of only fourteen senators to oppose the measure. Several leading Senate liberals--including Paul Wellstone, Tom Harkin and Pat Leahy--had voted for it."

[wyldwolf]

3. That's my point...

I believe there are a lot of new people to the political process on DU who don't yet have a command of issues and politicians.

To them, only IWR and the Patriot Act matters because that is what has been pushed here so long.

[DennisReveni]

5. And payola

David Horowitz was once a liberal, look at him now. Dennis Miller as well.
First you have post Clinton Democrats who are further to the right than ever before. The we love corporate cash crowd, which Kerry is one of the leaders.
Then you have a rabid right wing so far into fascism they call their immediate left, modern democrats, liberals. And we fall for it.
I think this cartoon sums it up perfectly.
http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2002/11/04/tomo/index.html

And as long as I am at it, i found the following. I will not subscribe to any of those services. I fear a TIVO type tracking of what I read.
I'm assuming this includes BOTH parties.
Someone who subscribes can interpret, please.

"Freshman US Senators fantastic stock investors
New York Times
"US senators' personal stock portfolios outperformed the market by an average of 12% a year in the five years to 1998, according to a new study. 'The results clearly support the notion that members of the Senate trade with a substantial informational advantage over ordinary investors,' says the author of the report, Professor Alan Ziobrowski of the Robinson College of Business at Georgia State University. He admits to being 'very surprised' by his findings, which were based on 6,000 financial disclosure filings and are due to be published in the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis... First-time Senators did especially well, with their stocks outperforming by 20 per cent a year on average - a result that very few professional fund managers would be able to achieve."

[blm]

7. That's an untrue assertion. Kerry NEVER took corporate pac money for any

of his campaigns.

YOU claim he's a leader of the "corporate cash crowd" but how is that possible when Kerry never took their pac money, has the best environmental record of ANY candidate, promoted legislation that favored small business over large corporations, has a lifetime prolabor rating of 91% and a liberal lifetime rating of 95%? That's further left than Ted Kennedy and Dennis Kucinich, even.

Care to explain?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

13. He receives no corporate cash?

Or he doesn't take corporate PAC money?

Two different things. He's awash in corporate money. That's not to say that that influences his vote but he'd be the first.

[blm]

15. His donations from them are no greater than any INDIVIDUAL.

He is NOT awash in corporate money, and you must be well aware how those stats were distorted by now, as they were CUMULATIVE over a 19 year period and came from individuals, and NONE from corporate pacs. The Daily Howler did a great debunking. Hope you read it.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. Read it. (DHowler) Let's get this on the record, though.

Kerry takes no corporate money. Right?


Yes or no.

[blm]

18. No corporate PAC money in any of his Senate campaigns.

I have always said it and many reporters have dug into that claim to try to trip up Kerry, but have not been able to dispute it. If you have proof otherwise, the Boston Globe would worship the ground you walked on.

You may be mistaking money donated to his personal pac that was distributed to the campaigns of others and to nonprofit voter groups.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Drop the word "PAC" and repeat your assertion.

[blm]

20. I am sticking with the facts I have maintained throughout.

Is my donation going to be construed as being from "corporate media" because my spouse works in a newsroom? It has been classified that way, already, hasn't it? Even though both of us have railed against the REAL corporate media for years now.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

21. I understand. I'm not counting that donation.

Unless it was over a $1000 at a time. Over half of his donations are of the $2000 variety. It was closer to 75% a month ago. Meanwhile, Dennis is at 9%. We both know what makes up the difference between those numbers. Edwards is much worse, btw.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. Given the manner in which the dark side of the CIA vets propaganda

there is reason to suspect Horowitz was EVER a liberal as we have seen with Kristol, Podhoretz and several other commentators going back a few decades..when Horowitz hit the scene, the CIA was still in the mdst of their cultural cold war which lasted through the late 70's. Not all documents from this era are entirely available through FOIA, therefore, I will wait for history to confirm whether Horowitz was ever in fact a liberal or a mole.

You are missing the link to your second item...and I don't see Kerry's name listed nor do I think his investments matter provided he did not trade immediately prior to a vote on an issue.

[corporatewhore]

12. well i define neoliberal by nafta/gatt/wto/imf kerry fits the bill

[blm]

4. FINALLY...A journalist is telling the GREATER story.

Thankyou so much for posting this.

It has been so disheartening that so many Democrats, even here at DU, are so ignorant of Kerry's actual record. There was a reason that most of the press omits or glossses over these details...the facts show once again how corrupt Republican administrations are and how much the media allowed them to get away with it.

[flpoljunkie]

6. Thank you, David Corn and The Nation magazine. Two excerpts:

In the fall of 1992 Kerry released a report on the BCCI affair. It blasted everyone: Justice, Treasury, US Customs, the Federal Reserve, Clifford and Altman (for participating in "some of BCCI's deceptions"), high-level lobbyists and fixers, and the CIA. The report noted that after the CIA knew the bank was "a fundamentally corrupt criminal enterprise, it continued to use both BCCI and First American...for CIA operations." The report was, in a sense, an indictment of Washington cronyism. In the years since, there's been nothing like it. Senator Hank Brown, the ranking Republican on Kerry's subcommittee, noted, "John Kerry was willing to spearhead this difficult investigation. Because many important members of his own party were involved in this scandal, it was a distasteful subject for other committee and subcommittee chairmen to investigate. They did not. John Kerry did."

<> The following year, a re-elected Kerry was in another lonely position as one of only five original sponsors of the Clean Money, Clean Elections Act, to provide for full public financing of Congressional elections. The measure would remove practically all special-interest money from House and Senate campaigns. (Kerry's colleagues were Wellstone, Leahy, John Glenn and Joe Biden--all Democrats.) "Kerry was totally into it," says Ellen Miller, former executive director of Public Campaign, a reform group pressing for the legislation. "He believes in this stuff."

In introducing the legislation, Kerry said on the Senate floor, "Special interest money is moving and dictating and governing the agenda of American politics.... If we want to regain the respect and confidence of the American people, and if we want to reconnect to them and reconnect them to our democracy, we have to get the special interest money out of politics." He was also a backer of the better-known McCain-Feingold legislation, a more modest and (some might say) problematic approach to campaign reform. But over the years he's pointed to the Clean Money, Clean Elections Act as the real reform. "It is a tough position in Congress to be for dramatic change in financing elections," says Miller. "It's gutsy to go out and say, 'Let's provide a financially leveled playing field so there is more competition for incumbents.' Kerry and Wellstone were the leaders and took a giant step. It was remarkable."

[blm]

9. This is why I get infuriated with the "Kerry is an insider" crowd.

They have to distort and outright LIE to accuse Kerry of being an insider, let alone, those who called him a "corrupt, Washington insider" as some folks here did for this whole past year.

IMO, they just proved how ignorant they are. Or incredibly irresponsible about spreading DISHONEST impressions of Kerry so people would look more favorably at their candidate.

[KittyWampus]

10. Land's Sake BLM, Kerry IS An Insider... But He's A White Hat

and has stood up and fought on more than one occassion.

I find it annoying as hell that politicians running like to call themselves "Outsiders" or are called such.

[blm]

11. Actually he was ostracized by the DC powerstructures for years.

It was Clinton who tapped him often on foreign policy issues that brought him into any inner circle, and that wasn't till the late 90s.

Land's sakes? Heheh...I haven't heard that in ages.

[emulatorloo]

14. Thanks for posting this - a nice antidote to willful misinterpretation

It was really great to see all this stuff again, and all in one place.

Some here at DU have taken a certain nameless candidate's fanciful primary campaign rhetoric at face value. Even though this nameless candidate did a pretty good job of backing away from said rhetoric and tried real hard to redeem himself in last debate he participated in.

JK is gonna make a tough nominee and a great President. . .THANKS AGAIN.


On edit - added a descriptive adjective

[salin]

17. great article

reminding me why I prefer items from the Nation to things from ... say... counterpunch.