Urgent - read!!! Our first battle, but Kerry home tomorrow (fri)

[jillan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/politics/politicsspecial1/27alito.html?_r=5&oref=login


get that email going.

[Blaukraut]

1. this is a horrible article

This creep Kirkpatrick is making JK out to be crazy and partisan, and that all the other Dems are uncomfortable with him and wish he'd quit his efforts. After skimming over some of Kirkpatrick's other articles, it appears the guy is a repug.
But good to know JK will be home tomorrow.

[JI7]

2. didn't the NYT just call on Dems to filibuster ?

wtf is wrong with them

[karynnj]

4. Their editorial staff is more liberal than their reporting staff

has been in the last 2 or 3 years.

[karynnj]

3. Well there's at least one lie in this

It says that Kerry has been emailing his internet people for "weeks". The email was sent early this week. Kerry told Blitzer from Israel about 9 or 10 days ago that he didn't know how he would vote, but would review the hearings and other things when he got back home.

This is really a very nasty piece. Are they shrilling for Bush again? Are they concerned that this puts Hillary in a place she doesn't want to be? Choosing to look like a hypocrite with her impassionated speech that was flatly delivered and voting against a filibuster or annoying the people in the middle.

[jillan]

5. my email

You did not report news in your article about John Kerry suggesting a filibuster.
You reported YOUR opinion.

The fact is, there has been so much excitement over his decision to take the lead on this. Many, many members of the Democratic Party have been watching in horror as Samuel Alito heads to the Supreme Court.

The President of the United States should not have played politics when he nominated this man. George Bush only won this election by a small margin.
This country is extremely divided. And rather than try to unite this country (another broken promise), he choses a nominee that represents everything that the democrats oppose.

Next time, print your article in the Editorial section. Or get the facts

[liberalla]

26. I agree -- opinion piece!

and a little gossip thrown in! yuck!

Hmmm, I think he mistakenly left this paragraph in:
"The president has every right to nominate Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court," Mr. Kerry said.
"It's our right and our responsibility to oppose him vigorously."

Gotta be a mistake! It's reasonable and makes sense... you know we can't have that. It'll confuse the sheeple.

[LeftyLizzie]

6. Wow . . . Ick!

what a horrible article! And what a clear effort to discredit Kerry! However, I'm glad to here that he'll be back here in Washington tomorrow . . . it makes it clear that he's committed to a fight.

[sandnsea]

7. "party leaders"

They keep referring to party leaders. Well that certainly wouldn't be Howard Dean, he's always ready for a fight. I don't think Lieberman has that much sway considering how much Dems hate him. Could be DiFi or Biden obecting I suppose. Bob Shrum was even feisty on Hardball today. That's why I still say Hillary, who has been noticeably absent from the filibuster debate.

[karynnj]

11. I guess Durbin, Kerry, and Kennedy are not party leaders either

I think you're right to them Democratic leaders = the Clintons.

I assume Kerry and Kennedy would not have gone forward if it was just 3 of them.

[whometense]

12. Except for this

(telling?) bit:
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/1/26/123745/548/2...

Bah (none / 0)

I hate half of my Senators. I called both, and Hillary's assistant said flat out there wasn't going to be a filibuster.

Why can't New York elect a liberal?

by Aguas de Marco on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 12:59:21 PM EST

Pretty much backs up what you were saying yesterday, doesn't it?? See what her message is, in private.

[jillan]

13. If Hillary doesn't join Kerry on this, she just lost the whole blogishpere

and she has no clue just how big it is.

Kerry wins big for this.

[sandnsea]

16. There it is then

Honestly, that makes me very sad. Flat out, no filibuster. Queen Bee. I think we've had quite enough of this sort of political authoritarianism from the goober in the White House.

[JI7]

20. btw, did you see this about Hillary and Portland

<Sen. Hillary Clinton's fundraising trip to Portland is under fire from some Democratic veterans who say she is siphoning away money that could go to local candidates.

The group, which includes Jim Rassmann, the Florence veteran who hit the campaign trail with John Kerry in 2004 to speak about how Kerry saved his life in Vietnam, have issued a letter denouncing the former first lady's support for the Iraq war.

"As Oregon veterans and members of military families," the letter says, "we are concerned with your fundraising trip to Oregon on two counts: your strong support for the immoral war in Iraq and your plan to take Oregon donations that are needed elsewhere."

Oregon Democratic Chairman Jim Edmunson acknowledged the veterans' point that the event might divert money that could have gone to local candidates, and said the state party tried without success to arrange a joint fundraiser that would benefit both Clinton and Oregon Democratic candidates.

Tickets for Friday's reception at the Portland Hilton are $50 a person and $1,000 for those attending a smaller reception where they can have their picture taken with the senator.

But Vietnam veteran John Calhoun, a Portland Democrat who gathered signatures from 31 fellow veterans and one mother of a veteran for the letter to Clinton, said some Democrats think the New York senator has not really distanced herself from her initial support of the war.

He also said that Clinton doesn't need the money from Oregon for her re-election campaign, which had nearly $14 million in the bank at last report and no strong opponent.

Calhoun and Rassmann were strong Kerry supporters in 2004. But Calhoun said the letter was not aimed at helping Kerry, who has said he may run again in 2008.

Clinton has criticized Bush's handling of the war and said Congress would not have authorized force "based on what we now know." But she has not joined such prominent Democrats as Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., in calling for an early withdrawal of troops. >

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--clinton-oregon0126jan26,0,5889202.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

[sandnsea]

21. I did not see that

:rofl: You know I love it though. So now I have to send a little check to the state with a note that it's in lieu of the Hillary Heist. And send Jim Rassman and John Calhoun thank yous. hahaha, I just LOVE IT. Calhoun was AWESOME last year, as big a fighter as Rassmann was. I don't want to put words in his mouth though, so I'll take him at his word that it's about the war. I'm also not terribly surprised at the State Party's response to Hillary, I'm betting Oregon will get behind Feingold if he runs. I told you Oregon was DU LIVE!!

[karynnj]

23. This is so obviously the antithesis of what Kerry is doing

"(Oregon chairman) said the state party tried without success to arrange a joint fundraiser that would benefit both Clinton and Oregon Democratic candidates. "

I can't believe she's so greedy if she already has $14 million and no opponent. It would also seem that money can't buy everything and annoying the state chairman in Oregon is likely not a good idea.

Side note: I hadn't realized that Rassmann was so antiwar. I love how he has stood up for Kerry and think it was cool that they developed such a nice friendship.

[sandnsea]

25. Not sure it's strictly anti-war

I got the impression it is more anti-Bush fucking up so badly. He spoke here last year, and in Portland, and I don't recall him being anti-war as much as anti-Bush. But he's totally loyal to Kerry, even though he said he saw things like the free fire zones a bit differently. He is incredibly honest too, he simply does not spin. When he was talking about the swift boat incidents last year, I remember that he stuck to exactly what he remembered and if something happened above the water when he was underneath, that's exactly what he said. I also remember getting the impression that he would have been a little more agressive if it were up to him. He didn't criticize the campaign or anything, it was just my impression by his demeanor at times. He's truly one of the good guys. We didn't get him to speak through the campaign, it was through one of the ladies who is in the local flower society with him. He's an orchid expert and flies all over the world to speak or judge orchids, something like that. Isn't that a kick?

[karynnj]

36. What a fascinating man

A marine to a police officer to an orchid expert. I was impressed with te steadiness he showed when he was asked questions. He was not a politician or someone used to the type of questioning he got - but he was great.

He has been very loyal to Kerry - it seems that chance that the man Kerry had the opportunity to save shares a lot of characteristics with him. It's wonderful that the campaign brought them back together.

[whometense]

32. Couldn't agree more.

My first reaction when I read that was, who the hell does she think she is? Well, I think you've supplied the answer: Queen Bee.

I've been watching, and if she's said a thing publicly aside from her floor speech I haven't seen it.

I honestly don't see a downside for Kerry on this. The contrast with HRC's cautious positioning speaks VOLUMES.

[wisteria]

18. Oh, I am convinced it's Hillary and the DLC,perhaps even Byah. n/t

[karynnj]

22. You had it so right earlier this week

I couldn't understand why you thought Hillary was part of the problem - even after her speech. I don't understand how she can justify her speech and then vote for cloture.

[sandnsea]

24. It's what's been in the papers

For a couple of weeks, I've kind of been noticing what is actually in the papers about the Democratic message, and it always seems like the message ends up being hers. There was some real momentum on Iraq, then all of a sudden it just died. Hillary and Lieberman are the main ones who haven't budged an inch on Iraq, and I just don't believe ol' Joe has any influence with the media at all. It just keeps pointing back to Hillary being the one calling the shots to help create a party identity that she thinks will compliment her in 2008. I do think there's a certain amount of DLC influence too, and that red state politics are considered. But it doesn't look so much like no Dem message gets into the media, but that it is just completely unrecognizable by most of us.

[Inuca]

27. Reid!!

I saw his short statement last evening (also mentioned in the upsetting NYT article), and he seemed obviously uncomfortable about the need to have a cloture vote. I am sorry (and also apprehensive, I trust the guy's political instincts) that he is not on board with this.

[ProSense]

8. Is this news or opinion?

Democrats cringed and Republicans jeered at the awkwardness of his gesture, which almost no one in the Senate expects to succeed.

Not one quote in this article supports the statement that Democrats cringed. And screw the Republicans.

[ginnyinWI]

15. ...and the horse they rode in on!!

:hi:

[ProSense]

30. Yup! And I see this as a conundrum for the Republicans, the media

and the wingnuts. That's why the CNN poll doesn't bother me (political doesn't imply bad, in fact, the implications can be very positive; conviction is excellent)


If Kerry is doing this because of conviction, then he's courageous (42%).


If it's politically motivated to pander to the Democratic base, given the coverage it has received, this is a shrewd move by an astute politician (58%). CNN Play of the Week winner for sure.


If he's doing it because he knew he had the votes, then he's all of the above and a leader (behind the scenes deal maker. (This is based on a GD post)


The other option (which the MSM, wingnuts and Republicans will try to trumpet) is that he's doing it without the votes and committing political suicide. This can be ruled out because it has been elevated to one of the above categories by the overwhelming support by the anti-Alito groups and the overwhelmingly defensive responses and spin from the critics.

[ginnyinWI]

38. like Bill Bennet on Blitzer yesterday

Tried to neutralize Kerry by saying how politically damaging it would be. Haha--he wishes. Like we should believe a loser like him.

They are talking about Kerry and Kennedy all over the media: NPR had something, as well as in the business news(?) on CNBC that my husband watches. But I'm pissed at Newshour for not mentioning it! CNN, I think, had the most coverage, actually--although it was snarky.

[jillan]

9. email address -

[e-mail]

[sandnsea]

14. Thanks

I looked for it and couldn't find it. I just emailed about that email nonsense and also asked him to spill the beans on which party leaders he was getting his info from. He has a First Amendment right to report that info and the American citizens have a right to know exactly who stands where.

[jillan]

17. Thanks for emailing him. We need to stay on top of this assholes.

It's going to be a busy weekend.
And I'm not going to get the spin machine get away with this.

[beachmom]

10. The article stinks because our situation politically stinks

Look at the quotes:

Republicans, Republicans, Republicans

And then I thought that quote from Reid was from the day before.

And then there was the fact that the Democratic caucus are, in fact, a bunch of wussies, who don't want to upset "the heartland".

Actually, you can't really blame the messenger for reporting the reality of D.C.

I tell you, guys. History will be on John Kerry's side on this. What's annoying is how John Kerry is the only one (well, with John F. Kennedy) who will lead. And the Washington establishment with its elite media in tow is trying to make him "pathetic". Like they all feel embarrassed for him.

Fuck 'em. THEY are the ones who will be embarrassed when horrible rulings start to be made by the Supreme Court. It's late, but I'll work on sending the NY Times an e-mail tomorrow. I mean I'm not a member of a "special interest group" like PFAW. I'm just somebody who wants the rights of my daughters to be protected. Don't these fuckers get this?

[ginnyinWI]

19. yeah-- just project this down the road a few years...

If Alito gets in and maybe one more like him, and Roe v. Wade gets reversed, and Choice is taken away, and maybe some other bad stuff comes down...and pretty soon Dem candidates start lining up for the next presidential campaign...

One BIG question will be: Where were you when they were taking the court to the right, and destroying our civil liberties? Why didn't you stand up for Democratic values?

Even if this isn't Kerry's motivation (I think it simply comes from his strong sense of justice and respect for traditional American liberal principles) he'll be on the right side of this question.

And maybe he learned something from the Kaine election last fall: people want someone with strong moral convictions, even if they don't agree with them on everything. That kind of person inspires trust.
He already has these. It just needs to become better known.

[Inuca]

28. A nicer article...

... info instead of oppinion. Key Democrats Try to Mount Filibuster Against Alito

Includes this bit: "In addition to Kennedy and Kerry, supporters of a filibuster included Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Paul S. Sarbanes of Maryland." (TayTay: your sweetie is in :-))

[beachmom]

29. Here's my e-mail

Thanks guys for giving me lots of ideas to include in the e-mail.

Sir,

I read your article about John Kerry attempting to have a filibuster against Alito with dismay, as you attempted to turn the whole thing into some kind of game that doesn't have any meaning. The article is also riddled with vague annonymous quotes like "Democrats cringed" which doesn't amount to reporting at all. You also made an error by stating that he has been sending letters for "weeks" to filibuster Alito when it only happened THIS WEEK, starting with rumors on Wednesday, and yesterday a post on Daily Kos followed by a Filibuster Alito e-mail in the wee hours of this morning.

Sir, you just don't get what's going on here. This is not about your Washington elite world that you traverse through. It's about "us", as in the citizens of this country outside the beltway. And John Kerry came to us, by posting for the first time on Daily Kos one week ago. I suggest you take a look at his diary and the 1200 comments that followed. It was a bit of a meet and greet, with LOTS of criticism for sure, as well as nice things said, and words of advice. The blogosphere is not abstract -- it's real, and it is OUR way of bypassing elite reporters like you who don't get what's at stake on so many issues including the Alito nomination. We have harnessed that power with our keyboards. John Kerry read those comments, saw the passion, and has responded back with passion of his own. He understands now more than ever that it's important that Democrats STAND UP and FIGHT, even if the odds are against us. Yes, I know he'll most likely lose, but we still remember the Alamo all these years later, now don't we? THIS is the story, my friend. Not what Hillary Clinton or a bunch of nervous red state Democrats have to say.

If you want to write another report like this one, it would be best to submit it to the NY Post or the National Enquirer. But if you intend to find out what's really going on, you'd do best to ask John Kerry himself about what blogs mean to him and how have they affected him, and then go to your computer and start reading what The People think.

Sincerely,
Beachmom

[karynnj]

33. Great letter - I love the Alamo reference

What is hard for me to believe is that in Kerry's case millions of people saw him in the 3 debates - He was serious and thoughtful to a fault. Anyone interested enough in politics to read a page 14 story in the NYT on his filibustering Alito, saw those debates and likely at least some of Kerry's talk show appearances. They also have likely read glowing comments about Davos and other conferences and know that this was a valid thing for Kerry to be doing.

Which makes me wonder if they've gone too far and show too clearly their own biases. The other thing is how and why did it become Kerry is leading a filibuster, when it appears from Wednesday that it was Kerry and Kennedy. Kerry's email clearly says it's both of them.

[ProSense]

34. Excellent response! Thanks.

Specifically: this is not a game.

[jillan]

35. Yeah Beachmom!

great letter:toast:

[ProSense]

31. A must see!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=257267&mesg_id=257267

[jillan]

37. yeah - thanks for the link n/t