Boston Globe on Kerry 2008--Quotes Kos

[Dr Ron]

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/06/26/democrats_split_on_a_2d_run_by_kerry/

[karynnj]

1. Oddly the article, in spite of itself, is reasonably positive

Look who they quote:

a Democratic consultant who worked on Senate campaigns for Kerry but who was not involved in his presidential run. <how transperent>

Chris Lahayne - < I'm sure he would have a fair view>

an unnamed Democratic member of Congress <possibly running himself, could this be Biden?>

Kos - who compared to what he would have said 6 months ago is 90% of the way to the fan category (except Kerry has too much integrity to pay him.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, think about this. There new conventional wisdom is the Kerry (and Gore) lost by not talking from the heart. If you believe this, you have to rule out every candidate who - on the biggest issue, Iraq - wanted a mealy mouth "year of significant transition". (Hillary has only taken tough stands on flag burners, lazy young people, and violent video games.

I think only Feingold and Kerry would qualify of all the Senators. None of the governors have said anything and Clark wrote the mush. I couldn't tell from Edwards comment if he would back K/F but its clear he would back Levin. (no, I'm not surprised that I couldn't figure it either way.

[beachmom]

2. I agree with Karynnj

Kos, if he still hates Kerry, is pulling his punches here. The mysterious Democratic lawmakers, OTOH, are atrocious.

You know, I wasn't there during the primaries, Dr. Ron, so maybe that's why I'm not as dead set against dKos as you are. Maybe we need to learn from the past, but put it aside a little here, too. What do you think?

[Dr Ron]

3. It extended beyond the primaries

From Kos this is mild, but with all the things he's said about Kos since the election we can't trust him. He has repeatedly misquoted Kerry to attack him and misrepresent his views.

[wisteria]

5. I wasn't here during the elections either, but I agree with you. From

all the nasty and out and out lying posts Kos did on Kerry, it turned me against him. I don't trust him at all. I think he gives Kerry a nod now because Kerry's posts bring in some new people and advertising.

[ProSense]

6. Kos is a

little shit. That's all!

[beachmom]

7. I NEVER said trust Kos. What I said is we should use his site.

Ever since John Kerry posted on dKos, Kos has stopped posting super nasty posts about Kerry. Only horse race comments, which were comparatively mild. To me, this signals that Kos WANTS Kerry supporters to use his site because he actually earns MONEY from increased traffic. Since this is his sole earning job, he will not blatantly blast Kerry again. If he does so, we will boycott his site. That at least is my strategy. But, seriously, I don't think it will come to boycotting him. He needs to make the mortgage payments, so he is not going to come out with BLATANT attacks on Kerry. If he does, then he will get an earful from me, and I bet you there will be "Kossacks" to back me up.

Once again, Markos does NOT equal DailyKos, at least as long as I'm posting over there.

[Dr Ron]

8. Using the site

Perhaps there may be some value in using the site, but as long as it is Kos's site this may or may not work.

If you are using his site, at very least make sure you wash your hands very well afterwards.

[beachmom]

9. But you rec'd my diary (thank you) the other day.

So you use the site, too. Oh, and I forgot to tell you -- ha, ha -- Armando made an appearance today on an Iraq thread and he was totally smacked down by some disgruntled Kossacks, who are still mad at him. I stayed out of that foray. Back but to using the site, when John Kerry posts, I assume you use the site. So, come on. I also go on the NYT website even though there's a lot of crap on there, too.

Oh, bother -- never mind, I'm bored with this conversation about Kos, he's not worth my poor fingers typing about him . . . :)

[Dr Ron]

10. Limited use

I do recommend diaries linked here (or in the rare cases I come across them). I also scan what is said there but its variable. I rarely post there--primarily doing so after Kerry has posted there to try to refute some of the attacks.

I always wash my hands afterwards.

[karynnj]

11. The blog format though has the potential of making this less dangerous

than a NYT op-ed columnist. Kos writes something, others post immediately - if they have good links proving the truth - it has only minor damage. The biggest problem is that Kos has his groupies.

[Dr Ron]

13. Response does help

But as you note, he has his groupies. Typically when Kos would say someting untrue about Kerry we might respond, but Kerry bashers would often still dominate the posts. At least we do have a number of pro-Kerry posts included so people can see both sides.

[karynnj]

14. Also, I think more of us are posting there

I had been intimidated and hadn't used the account I set up because people were so negative. Now, we sometimes are almost competitive in terms of number of people. Add to that that Kerry is easy to defend because he keeps doing good things.

I hope some of the non-Kerry people will bother to listen (or read) the speech today and consider what he is proposing.

[Dr Ron]

4. Qualify?

On the one hand it makes sense that only Kerry and Feingold would "qualify." On the other hand many in the Kos crowd remain fans of Warner, who gives no indication of being strongly anti-war.

[karynnj]

12. I wasn't really meaning Kos crowd - more the Boston Globe

(and other sources) that really have moved pretty close to saying Gore lost by not making the election about the environment and Kerry being totally anti-war. There point was to win, you need to speak out - not hide behind carefully calculated messages. (It's mystifying they say this is why we lost, then look to Hillary who they praise for doing just that.


The Kos people seem to want to play expert and are picking Warner more by his labels (Southern, Governor) than who he really is, wehat his vision is. He may get better, but he seems a bit weak as President.

[TayTay]

15. This was a rave, well coming from the BGlobe it was.

I was surprised to see something so positive from them. Especially since they ran that weird Iraq editorial on Sunday that said everything that Kerry has been saying needs to happen, yet indirectly dissed him for the timetable. (It was just a weird editorial. Too wishy-washy for me.)

[Dr Ron]

16. Not a rave, but perhaps bad publicity is better than none

Simply having articles appear discussing Kerry in 2008, even if with negative comments, might help make the idea sound more plausible to casual followers of politics.

[TayTay]

17. They have been ignoring Kerry.

However, the Senator has been speaking out more in speeches in Boston lately. (2 Faneuil Hall speeches in two months.) Maybe the BGlobe just needs to see our Senator more in order to become more kindly disposed toward him. (Provincial? Yup!)

The Globe is both happy and somewhat taken aback by how strongly Kerry is coming on. They don't quite know what to make of it. They were buying the spin that he was all done and should just think about going back to the Senate for the rest of his life. Ah, Globbies. I wish I knew why they love/hate Kerry so much and are so passive/aggressive toward him.