I received a reply from the questionable "site" .

[wisteria]

It carries forth on the same premise, that we have heard over and over again, Kerry didn't fight in o4 and that is the reason we have Bush. kerry never fights- unlike others- even Clinton- and we need real fighters in the party.
IMO, this is sounding more and more like a DLC connected site. Especially, with the veiled mentions of Clinton.

Here it is,

Thank you for your response to our petition. From the wide variety of comments that we have received, it is clear that our message is definitely striking a chord, and that is good. Many of you share our disappointment with candidates like John Kerry and desperately want to see a change in the leadership that represents our party. Others were incensed at the sheer hubris of our endeavor and sent vitriolic notes of dissent. To those people we say….YES!!! We thank you. You are more with us, than you could ever imagine. We pissed you off and what did you do? You stood up for your beliefs and sent us a verbal punch in the mouth, and THAT, is our point. Democrats need to stand up when confronted with lies, distortions, branding tactics, and any other kind of right wing, neo-conservative poison. When John Kerry was confronted with that challenge what did he do? He rolled over. The war hero was beaten up by the draft dodger. "Swiftboated" is now term in our political lexicon. WHY? Some of you have accused us of "Swiftboating" John Kerry with this petition. Is he that weak of a communicator that he needs YOU to protect him from a few people with a web site? That's the point we are trying to make.

Well, we say NO MORE. It's time for the next generation of Democrats to stand up. A generation that is fed up with being defined by the Republican spin machine and that has the stones to do something about it. Do we really hate John Kerry? No, of course not. We think that he is a patriotic, intelligent and gifted man who has done a lot for our country. He is a true hero. We voted for him, we sent him our money and gave him all of our support. But, when given the chance to stand up for what he believed in (let alone his personal reputation), he stammered, ducked and gaffed his way right out of the election. Can you imagine how much better the world would be today if he had won? As stated on the website, it wasn't losing that bothered us as much as never having thrown a punch. It is John Kerry and many of his generation of politically awkward Democrats that don't have the heart to play in today's political arena. We simply want change.

We are the party of Roosevelt, Kennedy and, yes, Clinton. We are the party that stood up for civil rights, womens rights, individual freedoms, the right to choose, gay rights, the environment, fiscal responsibility, global responsibility; we are the party of the people. History will show that at every crossroads in our countries history, it was the Democratic Party that boldly took our country forward. Now more than ever, we need strong Democratic leaders to take us bravely into the new millennium. There is much to do; this petition is just a shot across the bow.

[beachmom]

1. Somebody in that GD-P thread claims that this organization

is made up of corporate lobbyists who are Democrats (and no, that is not an oxymoron -- think of Silicon Valley, which is corporate AND liberal). Seriously, I don't think they're freepers -- all of them have written off John Kerry for '08 -- I've read their posts saying as much. They're not focused on Kerry for '08. These are Democrats, corporate Democrats.

I still haven't gotten a response. These people are pathetic -- "didn't throw a punch"? That's a lie.

Oh, just to reiterate, there's a bit of salesmanship and political consultancy speak in that reply. Their language gives them away.

[wisteria]

2. It goes beyond 08, they want him to just go away.

I get the impression reading the reply, this is a phony site with an agenda and they want to be able to promote someone who pretends to fight and stand up, but in truth is nothing more than money changer in sheep's clothing.

[beachmom]

3. Yep. But in bashing his '04 performance, they're trying to belittle

him EVEN IN THE SENATE.

[wisteria]

4. Oh,I agree.

I wasn't going to bring this up, but I was watching Keith Oberman last night during the "08" segment and he had Margaret Carlson on. Now, she has not been nice to Kerry since he lost the election and she did a sting piece about the botched joke. Typical Washington insider junk.
Well, in assessing Kerry's chances, she mentions that,
1. Rove might have done the Democrats a favor, by going after Kerry.
2. Refereed to losing Democratic candidates and Kerry as a loser in Dem's eyes
3. Then went on to suggest that even Gore went away for a while, got fat and taught then can out with book. Dem's wish Kerry would do the same.

What does all this mean? Well first, she ignores the fact that Kerry is an elected official- a Senator. Second, I believe she represents the feeling and concern of the corporate wing of our party who are concerned about Kerry's outspokenness and truth telling. They can't control him so they are trying to destroy him.

[rox63]

5. Then again, Margaret Carlson is married to Tucker Carlson

So keep that in mind when evaluating her opinions.

[wisteria]

6. No! Are you sure? She is much older than him. What a duo yuck! n/t

[blm]

11. No she isn't.

.

[rox63]

13. Really? I'd heard from several people that she was...

Perhaps they were misinformed. :shrug:

[blm]

15. yes - she's also about 15 yrs older than he. He is married to someone who worked

in Ashcroft's office, iirc.

[MBS]

18. yes, she's really married to him

. . or at least she was. I'd seen them together on some news show a few years back. . at one time they had a kind of Matalin-Carville act going. .

[blm]

25. No they didn't. There were always disclaimers that they were not related.

.

[beachmom]

8. There was one thing, she said, that was noteworthy

She said the joke thing was "overblown". She admitted that. I'm going to take that one piece of what she said, and say that's an improvement. The fact that NOT ONE of the elite punditocracy thinks he in any way insulted the troops is big. It shows that they are a bunch of liars who will use ANY excuse to undermine Kerry. They allied with Karl Rove just to go for the slaughter of Kerry.

And now they are admitting that they're liars and revealing their true agenda.

[wisteria]

9. Thanks for pointing that out. I was so focused on her negative comments

I didn't hear that comment.

[TayTay]

7. That is the unending Holy War in the Dem Party

It will go on forever. I agree with the Molly Ivins article, I want the Hillary Clinton faction to own up to be in the pocket of Wall St and corporate America. That way we can have an honest debate about what the people want versus what Big Money wants.

I think the people behind this website are part of this internal war. They are dumbing down the argument by suggesting that style is more meaningful than substance. That is the whole of their argument. (Honestly, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy Most attacks are built on fallacies. Knowing them, knowing their internal logic helps to defend and defuse them. Or check here: http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=270 This is a fun site that dissects the logic in bad arguments. Good stuff and offers ways to arm yourself agains the doofus, dumbbell arguments that are in and on the web.)

[blm]

10. Send them the Robert Parry article that details how much Clinton 'fought' against BushInc.

Clinton supported Bush2's major decisions on Iraq and war on terror for the entire 4 years he should have been siding with Kerry against Rumsfeld, against Bush's strategy at Tora Bora - but, Clinton would not do that - so they can go fuck themselves with their claim - Clinton sided with Bush and rehabbed Poppy Bush's reputation for the entire 4 years before 2004 election.

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

[sandnsea]

12. They're Clark people, IMO n/t

[wisteria]

14. Clark, a stand up to power kind of guy, willing to fight?

I respect the man's history, but I never thought of him that way.

[sandnsea]

26. Not Clark himself - just generic Clark people

They're a malicious bunch and the original attack was on dang near every Democrat except Clark or people who were similar candidates to Clark - southern, straight-spoken, etc.

[wisteria]

28. Oh, I realize that. I was comparing Clark to their description of the perfect electable candidate.

[sandnsea]

29. Oh

I see what you meant now. Any candidate can be anything anybody wants them to be because none of them have been put through what Kerry's gone through.

[blm]

24. I don't think so. Attacking Kerry on swifts would be attacking Clark as he and Cleland

took pointman for Kerry against the swifts.

They would in essence be saying that Clark failed, when he and Cleland actually did a pretty good job, but corpmedia gave an excessive amount of airtime and leeway to the swifts that only could have been combatted by a full force press from MANY Dems swarming.

Funny how Kerry gets the blame when it wasn't Bush out defending himself - he had the RNC and RW media. Kerry had a weakass DNC and very weak and new left media.

[sandnsea]

27. See #26 - Not Clark, Clark people n/t

[blm]

31. Then those people are idiots if they forgot that Clark led against the swifts

along with Cleland. They did much more than corpmedia would acknowledge.

[FrenchieCat]

30. How do you know this? I haven't heard of this site.....

In fact, you provide no link!

[Firespirit]

16. That is an extremely arrogant reply

Who do they think they are anyway?

"We're glad that you're emailing us to stand up for him. YOU are standing up for your beliefs and proving our point about Kerry. No matter how you react to our site, you're helping us! By the way, is your candidate so WEAK that he needs actual grassroots support and loyalty? But we don't concede any points to you and persist in our attacks."


I agree -- these are not amateurs. That is some truly mindblowing spin:

By responding angrily to their attacks, we're apparently proving their point. JK needs no grassroots support who will defend him against smears, and to have it is a sign of weakness.

I wonder what the response would've been if no one had responded with support. Oh, wait, I don't wonder, I know what it would have been.

These people are obnoxious as hell, and unworthy of any further interaction, in my opinion.

[wisteria]

17. I have had my say, and their points are all nonsense.

Kerry has real, genuine people on his side. They are the ones fighting for him.real people who believe in him and what he is doing. We aren't getting paid for our support. I suppose they are trying to claim no one but us defend him so he must be bad. Never mind that it is the corporate owned media and our own corporate Dem's that have issues with him and don't back him.

[WildEyedLiberal]

21. Grassroots support is WEAK?

What the fuck are they smoking??????

[fedupinBushcountry]

19. What a horrible response

I think they only heard from Kerry supporters, there petition has only 3 signatures, one was a made up name, which you cannot see, I can't remember it, and now they are showing only one name Linda Blaylock. But funny how they are not showing the first two signers, Scott Pope, and Mark Bornstein. hmmm. I think we need to remember those names.

[WildEyedLiberal]

20. Scott Pope is who the website is registered to

What ARROGANT assholes.

[blm]

22. Tell them that Bush never threw ONE PUNCH - the RNC and RW media did it all for him

while the DNC and the left media were completely ineffective countering them.

Kerry WON his matchups with Bush, and had the left and DNC spokespeople been better at countering the counterparts on the tube, there would be no swiftboating story, would there?

And it didn't START with swiftboating it started with IMPEACHMENT which happened for the exact same reason - the RW controlled the media storyline and a popular president was IMPEACHED - he was HELPLESS against impeachment and he had the bully pulpit.

The same thing happened to Dan Rather, so don't even PRETEND This is a problem unique to the swiftboat story.

[ProSense]

23. Corporate whores or wingnuts!

Do we really hate John Kerry? No, of course not. We think that he is a patriotic, intelligent and gifted man who has done a lot for our country. He is a true hero. We voted for him, we sent him our money and gave him all of our support. But, when given the chance to stand up for what he believed in (let alone his personal reputation), he stammered, ducked and gaffed his way right out of the election.

:wtf:

And how do they explain the wingnut ketchup reference in the PS? What a bunch of fucking assholes!

It's like the media: Say any fucking thing.