The Boston Globe recognizes Kerry's efforts for 06

[Mass]

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/11/07/kerrys_fate_could_hinge_on_a_big_democratic_win/

Kerry's fate could hinge on a big Democratic win

By Peter S. Canellos, Globe Columnist | November 7, 2006

WASHINGTON -- As national Democrats hang bunting and prepare for what they hope will be a joyous victory celebration in Washington tonight, John F. Kerry will be back in Massachusetts, quietly standing behind his state's gubernatorial nominee.

No one has worked harder to bring about a national victory than Kerry: National Journal reported yesterday that Kerry had stumped for more candidates this year than any other Democrat -- a whopping 170, according to his office.

Kerry's treks around the country were supposed to help erase bad memories of 2004 -- convincing Democrats that Kerry was a dogged worker and belonged among the party's top contenders for 2008.

Instead, the campaign ended with the senator on the sidelines, grounded like a high-schooler caught misbehaving in class during the week before the prom.

...

In a fairer world -- that is, a nonpolitical world -- the gaffe would be easily dismissed. Kerry is a decorated combat veteran, and he has stood with veterans on hundreds of stages, and on dozens of issues, during his 22 years in the Senate.


His decision to lead the libuster against Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. earlier this year had won him liberal support. His early endorsement of a timed withdrawal from Iraq had brought clarity to his views on the war.

...
Now, Kerry has to hope that a big Democratic victory wipes away his sins -- or at least leaves them on a par with those of some potential 2008 rivals. After all, Hillary Clinton has issued her own share of groan-inducing quotes, starting with a crack about not wanting to stay home and bake cookies. Former Vice President Al Gore, the party's 2000 presidential nominee, was treated roughly by the Republicans, and John Edwards was fairly toothless as Kerry's running mate in 2004.

Kerry can only hope that he, too, survives to fight again.

He has worked hard for another shot at the White House. But there are now real questions about whether he'll be able to take it.

[Island Blue]

1. This is awesome.

This would make a great GD-P post if you haven't done so already. :)

[MBS]

2. nice to see this

First , the National Journal is a respected reporter of DC doings.
Second, from my reading of him (maybe longer-term Globe readers can offer a more authoritative take here. . ), Canellos usually spouts a conservative-ish and/or Beltway-"Widsom"-contaminated POV. So acknowledgement of Kerry's efforts by someone like that seems to me especially notable

[Mass]

3. This WaPo writer does too, interestingly

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15596749/

Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) was a popular Democratic guest speaker until an event in California last week for gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides, when he botched a joke about Bush and the war in Iraq.
...

This article is largely about Obama and the same "Juliet Eilperin" participated in the article, but, even then, they cannot deny that Kerry was in demand.

[karynnj]

4. I love these two sentences

Instead, the campaign ended with the senator on the sidelines, grounded like a high-schooler caught misbehaving in class during the week before the prom.

...

In a fairer world -- that is, a nonpolitical world -- the gaffe would be easily dismissed. Kerry is a decorated combat veteran, and he has stood with veterans on hundreds of stages, and on dozens of issues, during his 22 years in the Senate.
******************************************************

Only he was only framed to look like he was misbehaving when he was the nicest kid in the whole class

[globalvillage]

5. Thanks, Mass.

What a great way to start this very special day! Time for me to get out there and help with one last push.
Have a fabulous Election Day, all.
Make it blue.

[ProSense]

6. Awesome! Thanks!

Ditto Karyn and GV!

[rox63]

7. Nice to see JK getting kudos again

Especially after last week. :thumbsup:

[wisteria]

8. I want to know what those "questions" are.

All concerning the missing "us" in a phrase? There wasn't even any malicious intent against the troops involved in his words. When you explain the situation to reasonable people and you present his record supporting our troops, people realize it was a dirty Republican trick.
Frankly, Rove did this in the hopes of finishing him off. His reputation is as such. The fact that Kerry resurrected himself and went after the President and the administration, must of been cause for some questioning of Rove's abilities.
Honestly, he has to keep on fighting and trying. He can't let all of those who have been stepping on him and knifing him in the back- get away with it. He deserved the Presidency more than any of those supposedly running.

[Mass]

9. It is a very positive article from somebody who is not a Kerryfan.

People are asking questions, whether these questions are deserved or not. This is all the writer was saying. And yes, Rove did a dirty trick, but Kerry has to be able to answer, and I have no doubt he would have been, if it had not been for wanting to help the other candidates by laying low. The questions Cannellos asks are reasonnable questions, and questions Kerry will need to answer to if he wants a shot at the nomination.

As for deserving the Presidency, this is not the point. The presidency is not about deserving; it is about serving. It is about being the one who can solve the problems of the country the best. And I have no doubt Kerry can. Now, he has to make his case to the American public.

[karynnj]

10. McCasgil was just asked about it on MSNBC

She said that she hasn't heard about it on the campaign trail and compared a botched joke (which she said was dumb) and a botched war. (It sounded way less negative than my writing - she was dismissing it out of hand. )

This is a fairer article than I would have expected - and it gives Kerry credit for what he did do.

Having stepped back from the details - I suspect that had Kerry been letter perfect on every joke, something similar would have happened. The BIG underlying issue is the war and at least since April Kerry has been making the case that continuing Bush's policy is immoral and can't work. It is obvious they would attack him - for the same reason Nixon attacked him in 1971. They would have taken some Kerry statement against the war as against the troops instead of against Bush's policy.

Consider that Kerry said that waiting till after the election to change a failed policy was morally wrong. He was going to get attacked.

[wisteria]

13. Good! This should blow over. It was overblown and over-reacted to. n/t

[Mass]

14. It is exactly how they should have all answered.\nt

[wisteria]

12. No doubt, all you say is true.

There is certainly the question of who can best serve this county, but I have already concluded it is Senator Kerry, so my statement goes beyond that and requests some justice for someone who has fought harder than any other pol for the right to try again for the presidency.So for me, there should be no questions needing an answer.I suppose it is all about seeing the underdog prevail.

[Inuca]

11. That's exactly....

... my reaction when I keep seeing/hearing things like this. I would accept it (not agree mind you, but accept as something that can be argued by a sane person) criticism about his reaction to the whole thing, but the gaffe by itself has ZERO significance, and seeing it interpreted in a 1001 meaningless ways makes me mad. In any case, for today this can be put on hold. Good luck everyone!!!

[wisteria]

15. Perhaps, he needs to stop listening to our advise on how to fight back.

After all, many of us would have done the same thing as Senator Kerry- not wanting to apologize. Did he play into Rove's hand's by responding or could it of been worse it he apologized and tried to move on. Maybe, he should of shrugged it off,maybe not. An apology would of looked like he wasn't fighting back. Then it could of been said of him, that he hadn't learned anything from the last election and did not respond to the attack by denying it, or responding quickly.
My take is, that they were going after all the Dem's by going after him. He was the one person the base could recognize by name association. They had been trying to rally the base with the name Nancy Palosi, but she is not a household name- so better to use Kerry. IMO, there were no good moves to make. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

Obviously, it doesn't matter in Washington if you were wronged or if you are right or wrong, just apologize for something you didn't say and move on. It doesn't matter if it could jeopardize your career.

[whometense]

16. A propos of this, at The Premise

I think this version of things makes a lot of sense.

http://thepremise.com/archives/11/07/2006/596

November 7th, 2006 - 9:31 am | Link

From an excellent post by Digby on a whole host of perverted realities: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_digbysblog_archive.html#116278777424008117

After the first news cycle everyone knew he’d blown a punchline. There were even plenty of conservatives who admitted it. But that didn’t matter. What mattered was forcing him to apologize for something he never said. It was a pure act of force, as if they put their foot on his neck and demanded that he agree that “up is down and black is white” — a modern show trial in which Kerry agreed to confess in order to spare his party’s chances in the upcoming election. He instinctively resisted, as sane people always do when forced to deny reality. But the sheer power of the coordinated Republican outcry (with the willing help of cynical Dems and the media) finally made it imperative for him to issue an apology for something he never said.

That’s what happened.

– Mark Barrett

[beachmom]

17. My take on the "botched joke" changes daily

I really just don't know what to think. I go from it being the most nothing thing ever to a disaster that'll ruin his '08 chances all within a day. I still say any joke involving Iraq should go on the chopping block. Even Jay Leno had trouble making it funny, and botched the line, too -- and he's a professional stand-up comedian! You know, if this thing amounted to him being lampooned on all the comedy shows, well, that's life, and he couldn't complain. But the fact that it took this ludricous turn into "you insulted the troops -- apologize immediately!", just makes the whole thing so unreal. I think we need more time to go by to really get what relevance, if any, it has on, well, anything.

I did talk to a couple of people about it here, and here were the two answers I got:

1. What Kerry story? I haven't been watching the news, so I must have missed it.
2. The second person -- I talked about how there were more important issues like events in Iraq than some stupid botched joke, and she readily agreed with me.

And, maybe, just maybe, those troops who held up that sign in Iraq were just having fun with it, and KNEW JK wasn't insulting them, but just enjoyed lampooning him just like Jon Stewart.

What I find to be possibly more interesting is Andrew Sullivan's take -- that this hurt Hillary and John McCain more than anyone else (Andrew now seems to like Obama, which for a conservative, is rather good -- I don't expect him to support JK, just not to bash him unfairly.) Anyway, somebody needs to find the video of Jay Leno botching the same joke; if that gets decent play, then I think that kills the story permanently.

Headline: Even Jay Leno Couldn't Get the Joke Right

or:

Like Iraq, this joke was doomed from the start!

[ProSense]

18. This says it all:

He instinctively resisted, as sane people always do when forced to deny reality.

The sheer force of the media outcry was fed by the pile-on Democrats, they need to accept that! As a result of that, the media immediately turned this into a story about Dems calling for Kerry to apologize. They didn't even need to use the GOP.

The wingnut blogs go into feeding frenzies (for days) all the time, and while these are sometimes picked up by the media, they often appear as biased stories because the Democrats don't bite. Look at Harry Reid. Imagine if Democrats had responded to those attempts (and there were many here in doubt without knowing the details) by making demands and casting doubt on him instead of the reports.

Not that a statement criticizing Bush even compares, but what caused some Democrats to respond the way they did? It was irrational to call for Kerry to apologize for something he didn't say. Although the election was within days, Democrats could have used the attack to spotlight Iraq. It would have been great because the Democrats could have leveraged that to spotlight the dirty GOP tricks that are now being reported!