Edwards takes lion's share of heat, but what of Dem party's BIGGEST VOICE

[blm]

in the world and the person who most Democrats point to as a 'perfect political pitch' campaigner?

Anyone remember what was said by Bill to European leaders in 2005? You see, according to Bill to THIS audience, it wasn't election fraud or media manipulation that kept Bush in office, it was that Kerry wouldn't stand LOUDLY AND FIRMLY AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE.

Remember Rocco Buttiglione?

http://www.theamericanmag.com/article.php?show_issue_id=12&show_article_id=418

>>>>>
So you’re saying that America has gone through what Europe is experiencing and come out the other side?

There’s been a reaction — a very positive reaction, but when I say this, please do not identify me with uncritical support of Mr. Bush because the reaction goes through the presidency of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush’s father, and William Jefferson Clinton — who is a Christian. You might say he’s a sinner, yes — we’re all sinners — but he’s a Christian, and he won the elections on a platform in which family values were central. Then you have George W. Bush. All those presidents have incorporated into their program family values and a substantial coming back to Christian values.

Albeit somewhat Calvinist?

Well, so be it, but we’re all sinners. George W. Bush is a born-again Christian. Which makes me think, I wonder whether Bill Clinton could have overcome the opposition of my position in the European Parliament? It is very interesting what Clinton said about Kerry’s defeat. He said we Democrats will never again win an election in the United States until we find somebody who is not afraid of speaking out in the name of God and saying clearly that we’re against gay marriage. Kerry was against gay marriage but did not say this with enough conviction and not often enough: This is not Buttiglione speaking but a quotation from William Jefferson Clinton.
>>>>>

[lojasmo]

1. And yet we just won a bunch of elections

without falling for that wedge issue crap.

[blm]

2. Exactly - and with the 50 state strategy, too, that rebuilt collapsed party infrastructure

due to a decade of neglect from that same crowd.

Time to put the myths about perfect political instincts to REST.

[madfloridian]

3. Amazing.

"Albeit somewhat Calvinist?

Well, so be it, but we’re all sinners. George W. Bush is a born-again Christian. Which makes me think, I wonder whether Bill Clinton could have overcome the opposition of my position in the European Parliament? It is very interesting what Clinton said about Kerry’s defeat. He said we Democrats will never again win an election in the United States until we find somebody who is not afraid of speaking out in the name of God and saying clearly that we’re against gay marriage. Kerry was against gay marriage but did not say this with enough conviction and not often enough: This is not Buttiglione speaking but a quotation from William Jefferson Clinton. "

And he said Dean forfeited the right to be president for signing the civil unions bill. Didn't matter someone in that community is suing him anyway because they say he isn't supportive enough.

And Bill gets zero criticism. Go figure.

[blm]

4. Gets very little criticism PLUS is credited with being the best political voice

with perfect political pitch.

Can you believe the total disconnect? But what they DO do better than any other Democrat is undermine REAL Democrats.

[blm]

5. PM kick

.

[rinsd]

6. Ya got a source for that quote other than Buttiglione

"It is very interesting what Clinton said about Kerry’s defeat. He said we Democrats will never again win an election in the United States until we find somebody who is not afraid of speaking out in the name of God and saying clearly that we’re against gay marriage."

"
This is not Buttiglione speaking but a quotation from William Jefferson Clinton."

Except I can't find it anywhere but in this article.

[blm]

7. Why? I'm sure if Buttiglione heard wrong then TeamClinton would've refuted this immediately.

Besides, it's just another version of similar comments Bill was making throughout the 2002 and 2004 election cycles. So, why would you doubt that he said it again to European leaders?

[rinsd]

9. Again, because the smear has not been challenged does not make it true.

By your logic the Swifties charges against Kerry were true until Kerry decided to challenge them.

"Besides, it's just another version of similar comments Bill was making throughout the 2002 and 2004 election cycles"

Not it is not. Show me where Clinton said Kerry should have come out more strongly gainst gay marriage.

"So, why would you doubt that he said it again to European leaders?"

Why do you take the word of a slimy rwer?

[blm]

13. Here you go

and the article links to Shrum's book and Newsweek article from 2004.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/52670/http

[AtomicKitten]

15. That mean old Bill Clinton made St. Kerry lose the election.

That's right. You read it on a blog.

Unfortunately, that old chestnut only rings in the ballpark of valid if one only consumes predigested blog slog. I again will point out that unless folks are suggesting Kerry was Clinton's personal hand-puppet, Kerry is a grown man, chose his own course, and from the article captioned below clearly had his own proclivities regarding gay marriage. But, of course, that makes it entirely Bill Clinton's fault.
Oy vey. Just like every time this old chestnut is dragged out for yet another flogging by the faithful. :eyes:

From the Boston Globe:

Kerry backs state ban on gay marriage
Says amendment must provide for civil unions

TOLEDO, Ohio -- Presidential candidate John F. Kerry said yesterday that he supports amending the Massachusetts Constitution to ban gay marriage and provide for civil unions for gay couples.

In his most explicit remarks on the subject yet, Kerry told the Globe that he would support a proposed amendment to the state Constitution that would prohibit gay marriage so long as, while outlawing gay marriage, it also ensured that same-sex couples have access to all legal rights that married couples receive.

* snip *

Kerry's remarks angered supporters of gay marriage in Massachusetts, but could help stalled efforts by state legislative leaders to win support for their amendment. The amendment written by Senate President Robert E. Travaglini and Senate minority leader Brian Lees would restrict marriage to heterosexuals but create a same-sex civil union system that would provide all the benefits and protections of marriage.

"It is harmful for us and could well affect the vote," said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, which strongly opposes such an amendment.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/02/26/kerry_backs_state_ban_on_gay_marriage/

[Stevepol]

8. I doubt the quote, but even if true, it's bull shit. KERRY WON THE ELECTION.

Until Dems can get used to the FACT that the 04 election was a near landslide for Kerry, they will never cease making ridiculous statements like the aforesaid (which I doubt was even made).

Dems will win nearly every election all over the country once the votes are counted fairly and people are not disenfranchised by intimidation or ex-felon lists or caging lists or rigged voting machines, etc. etc. etc.

[blm]

10. I agree that Kerry won and had the DNC worked to secure the election process he

would be in the WH today.

However, Buttiglione's quote is very similar to comments Clinton has made before about gay marriage, including telling Kerry to publicly support anti-gay marriage bills on the ballots in some states. So, why would anyone doubt he said this in Europe to conservative leaders there?

[rinsd]

11. If its so similar please post them

"However, Buttiglione's quote is very similar to comments Clinton has made before about gay marriage, including telling Kerry to publicly support anti-gay marriage bills on the ballots in some states."

It should be easy to find then. Let's see these very similar quotes.

[blm]

14. Here you go - links to Newsweek article and Shrum's book are also at this link.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/52670/http

Gee - all this stuff has been posted many times here at DU, so I'm surprised this is news to you.

[rinsd]

16. Bob Shrum is your evidence? LOL!

I suppose all he said about Kerry was true as well.

:eyes:

Assuming Bob Shrum isn't the lying scumbag he really is, the basic gise of Clintons; advice (no quotes, when Buggilione was supposed quoting Clinton) was that Kerry should support some state bans. It had nothing to do with Kerry being louder on this issue and I see no mention of God there.

IOW, not similar to what Buggilione was "quoting".

[blm]

17. Did you purposely ignore the 2004 Newsweek article, too? This has been posted many times

on DU in many threads since it first happened and NOW you choose to doubt it happened?

And surely TeamClinton would have corrected Shrum's recollection of events if he was so wrong - wouldn't they? You know how meticulous they are about correcting false stories.

[rinsd]

18. The Newsweek article is quoting an anonymous source who many have speculated was Shrum

And by your logic since Shrum has not come out and refuted it, it must be true.

:eyes:

[blm]

19. Clinton never refuted the Newsweek article or Shrum book on this episode.

And why would Kerry be quoted as saying, "I'm not going to do that" if it was never suggested?

Neither Kerry OR Bill Clinton has denied this happened, so why do YOU?

[rinsd]

20. Bob Shrum + Italian RWer - Refutation = Truth

2 + 2 = 5 anyone?

[blm]

21. Neither Kerry or Clinton or anyone in their office has denied this episode happened.

Why do YOU do it? Because you know what he did was WRONG, but Clinton's image needs your protection.

[rinsd]

26. "Why do YOU do it?" Simple.

Because of the absurd logic that non-refutation makes something true.

Even more, you think this shit helps Kerry's image?

[blm]

27. Non-refutation for a pol whose team is known for correcting false stories quickly?

And after the story has been printed more than a few times since 2004?

You want to talk about absurd?

Everyone knows Clinton advised Kerry about this for the last few years except those who don't WANT it to be true so they deny it happened.

[AtomicKitten]

12. If it's Thursday ...

that means it's the mean old Bill Clinton versus St. Kerry grind again.

:boring:

[blm]

24. I guess you must mean this old boring yawner....

"None of this stuff is true - how could it be - Clinton is perfect and selfless." (Yawn)


This talk by historian Douglas Brinkley occurred in April 2004:

http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Whom does the biographer think his subject will pick as a running mate? Not Hillary Rodham Clinton. "There's really two different Democratic parties right now: there's the Clintons and Terry McAuliffe and the DNC and then there's the Kerry upstarts. John Kerry had one of the great advantages in life by being considered to get the nomination in December. He watched every Democrat in the country flee from him, and the Clintons really stick the knife in his back a bunch of times, so he's able to really see who was loyal to him and who wasn't. That's a very useful thing in life."
>>>>>


http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward


Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)

By M.J. Rosenberg |

I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.
On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.
>>>>>

http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

[rinsd]

25. yeah because you haven't posted that ad naseum

And since we're in the mood ofr rehashing old BS.

Please tell me why Kerry only care about the provisional ballots when he had a very small chance of winning vs no chance?

Why did he allow Bush to take the election? Why did he leave $10M on the table?

"
Whom does the biographer think his subject will pick as a running mate? Not Hillary Rodham Clinton. "There's really two different Democratic parties right now: there's the Clintons and Terry McAuliffe and the DNC and then there's the Kerry upstarts. John Kerry had one of the great advantages in life by being considered to get the nomination in December. He watched every Democrat in the country flee from him, and the Clintons really stick the knife in his back a bunch of times, so he's able to really see who was loyal to him and who wasn't. That's a very useful thing in life."

Hmmm that's funny because here's your other source Bob Shrum

"But there were two other clear possibilities: Dick Gephardt and Hillary Clinton. Kerry was ready to partner with Clinton if it was the way to win, but he doubted it was. He liked Gephardt, was confident he was up to the job of being president, and hoped he might help carry Missouri, which could make the difference in a close election. But both he and Teresa worried that Gephardt was a gray choice who wouldn't light any fires. While Edwards might, they were both uneasy with him. I'd said to Kerry early on that all I cared about was picking the strongest choice—personal feelings had nothing to do with it."

[blm]

28. Shrum's partners work with Clinton. I'm not surprised he views it that way.

I'd say Brinkley is a greater observer of events as a historian.

Shrum is a speechwriter who acts as a campaign advisor, and with partners working for Clinton, no doubt he had to present a case to campaign for Hillary as VP. And I am sure others disabused him of that idea because they observed the backstabbing that Shrum may have even been part of, unwittingly or not - being fed bad info from polls and focus groups - like don't bring up BCCI because it confuses people. Or did you miss that gem?

[BeyondGeography]

22. When he's done criticizing Kerry, maybe he can explain how his presidency weakened the Party

Bill Bradley: Clinton-centric party was weaker in the end

Q: You criticize Bill Clinton in your book as an illustration of the painful limitations of charisma.

A: Bill Clinton was the first two-term Democratic president since F.D.R. and was enormously popular — and yet at the end of eight years in office, there were fewer Democratic senators, fewer Democratic congressmen, fewer Democratic governors, fewer state legislators, and the party was in debt. You can be regarded as a charismatic president, and yet it doesn’t translate into structure.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/magazine/25WWLNQ4.t.html?ex=1181361600&en=2244709adb4e11d0&ei=5070

[blm]

23. And implemented a targeted state strategy for the DNC which actually ALLOWED

the collapse of state party infrastructures in every red and crucial swing state.

Gore would be president today if the party infrastructure in Ohio and Florida were stronger and the voting process was secured as a matter of standard attention.