I'm watching JK's Georgetown speech and I'm confused about something.

[Island Blue]

Why isn't this man living in the White House? Just askin'. :shrug:

[TayTay]

1. Yeah, ain't that the truth

But there is no where to go but forward, so that is where I'll go. (But with a sad nod to the past and what might have been as well.)

[karynnj]

2. Same here - the thought process behind the speech is brilliant

It has so many tiny, well designed pieces that having both read it and saw it last night - there are giant pieces I haven't even been able to logically process. What amazes me, is I think the prevailing opinion has been a loss for what could exist between pull out now and stay the course, but do it right.

If you take just the role to be played by US Military, there is so much detail. Reducing their number, declaring we want no bases and giving Americans the safer, rear position supporting the Iraqis seems so obvious as he said it. (Especially when it means that Iraqis, who actually speak the language, will do the search and destroy and the policing.) Even this part, immediately signals the shift from occupier to ally.

I wonder how much his own first hand view of Vietnamization had to do with this. In the 70s, he seemed frustrated that when things were defined as joint missions, the Vietnamese were not very helpful. It sounds from the Laird article, that Laird is now saying things about Vietnam that Kerry said in the 70s.

The political part hurts my head when I try to understand it. Is anyone else surprised that he explained such a detailed complicated plan in the speech. The military part alone has more detail and logic in it than anything proposed by anyone else. The way all the pieces seem to send compatible signals (military in rear position, US as one ally, bringing in other allies, no permanent bases) is beautiful.

Although the whole seems stronger than the parts, even if Bush made only the proposed role shifts of the US military and the Iraqis - this would have a major positive effect.

[frogmarch]

3. Excellent presentation

but a lot for me to digest quickly!

I was surprised to learn from Kerry that Bushco is refusing to let Iraqi soldiers be trained anywhere but in Iraq. Kerry said that other countries - Egypt is the one I distinctly remember him naming - have offered to train Iraqis, but Bushco insists they all be trained in Iraq.

Why?

[TayTay]

4. Extreme control

Egypt might push their own agenda and the troops might not be exactly what the neocons want. It's silly, but true.

[karynnj]

5. In the Jan hearing for Rice after Kerry's trip to Europe and the ME

he told her the same thing - France, Germany, Jordan and Eqypt all offered to train relatively large numbers (which I forget) of Iraqis outside Iraq. She and Bush ignored him - also before going on her first trip to Europe and the ME, Rice turned down Kerry's offer to meet with her first. (as he had just been there - and is a pretty seasoned statesman. She could reject any conclusions he made, but to turn down any input is nasty.)

They just seem so ideological that they still consider Kerry an enemy - even though he conceded graciously and has always made the point that foreign policy should be bipartisan.

[FreedomAngel82]

6. Because they stole it

Anywhere online where I can get this speech? I didn't have a tape ready to video it this morning. :(

[jillan]

7. I second that question.

He just 'gets it'.

The only time I picked up on him feeling a little uncomfortable was when a student asked him about Syria. BUT I do remember that Kerry went to talk to some dignitary in Syria about this very thing, insurgents coming across the border.

His speech provided an understandable way to continue with the mess that Iraq has become. You can tell he has really thought things thru and must be frustrated to continue to watch the bushiters make it worse.

On a personal Kerrycrat note, I loved the way he interacted with the audience, the Dean, and the young woman that introduced him. He is awesome.

[beachmom]

8. I watched the speech, and he had me when he walked on the stage!

And people were clapping, and suddenly they all stood up, and I felt a bit choked up myself. I've already said before how much that speech said what needed to be said.

But I loved the Q&A part, especially the fact that there were Navy Academy grads asking questions (aren't they mostly conservative?). Some people were especially nice to him, although there were no plants that said "you're the greatest senator ever!!", "I feel so blessed that you're in the U.S. Senate!!". If I could ask a question I would ask about the al Qaeda manifesto about the ME that was discovered in Iraq. Very scary stuff. I would want to know how he takes their agenda into account with his plan. Not a softball question, but I want to know what he thinks of that paper.

But, yes, he ought to be president. No doubt.

[Island Blue]

9. I loved the Q & A part too

Imagine - he's able to answer questions without a script or without a rehearsal. I hope they replay this on cspan this weekend because I had to watch it online this morning and didn't get to give his words the 100% attention they deserve because I was also doing normal morning stuff. It didn't take my complete and full attention however to see just how presidential the man is.

[LeftyLizzie]

10. The Q&A was great

I thought that his exchanges with the students were totally natural and relaxed - he definitely showed his personality. Also, when I was talking to him after the event, he was the same way with all of us. There were about ten of us standing around talking to him - we were almost all girls, and he was just so sweet and genuine. There was nothing uncomfortable about it at all - he seemed as if he genuinely wanted to be there, talking to us. Some people say that he has a hard time connecting with people, but he definitely connected with all of us who were standing there!

[MH1]

11. Don't get me started....

Really, if I tried to answer your question, I'd start saying some ugly things about certain groups of so-called Americans. And it would be really hard to stop...

So I will just say, he should be.

[_dynamicdems]

12. A really sore subject...

I'm starting to blame Democrats as much as Republicans for giving * 4 more years to ruin our country. Kerry got half-hearted support from quite a few Dems. It was like the old saying that begins, "With friends like these..." And now Dems are turning on him like a pack of rabid dogs. All the mistakes were Kerry's. Yeah, right. Talk about scapegoating!

When the polls had him neck-and-neck with Bush, I heard Dems bemoan to the talking heads that Kerry wasn't inspiring, personable, etc. They criticized his campaign while it was still in progress. What the hell were the undecided voters to think when folks who were supposed to be supporting Kerry picked him apart right along side the Republicans?

I just read an article saying that Kerry finally has a policy on Iraq, a year too late! This is infuriating. Where were these people during Kerry's campaign that they didn't hear the clear message Kerry repeated over and over and over again?

How do people like these get jobs in journalism anyhow?

[sandnsea]

14. Yep, this is why we really lost

Have you read his Jan 2003 speech, "do not rush to war"? This speech, the Q&A, the interaction afterwards, it's the Kerry I've been watching forever. How about when he was on Chris Matthews at the Citadel, before the IWR vote, excellent exchange with those kids. He gave a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations that was called the most brilliant foreign policy speech in a decade. Did you hear that on the cablenews? Nope, and not in the blogosphere either except on the Kerry blog and a few others. In fairness, you didn't hear it from our own Dems in Congress either. I think too many of them were too frightened to actively support a "Massachusetts liberal". I think these are the reasons we weren't able to create a real sense of unity and vision and it's alot more important than how pro-choice or pro-gay he is. We let them drag us into their ring every time we talked about what they wanted to talk about, abortion, gay marriage, his Vietnam record, the vote, the $87 billion. We didn't fight our fight and that's what you have to do to win.

[sandrakae]

13. Because there are 60 million morons in this country.