Dirty tricks for 08 are already here.

[Mass]

We are still in the fight for 06, and it is far from being won, but sadly, some people think that it is great to create dissension for 08.

Read this and ask yourself who benefits from it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/444202p-374020c.html

The only question I have is why? Is Kerry such a danger that some want to see him out of the race?

ON EDIT: Yes the article is totally stupid and I do not know anybody who interpreted the Kennedy email the way they did, but I cannot avoid thinking that this article has been fielded by the team of another potential 08 candidate (the reference about Kerry pressuring Edwards for example: from where does this come? They invented that themselves?).

[wisteria]

1. Obviously, they are trying to make something out of nothing. It seems

obvious that Kennedy is supporting some of Edward's endeavors by asking for donations on his behalf- that is all.
You know, there seems to be a pattern emerging regarding all things said negatively about Kerry, it goes like this, Kerry gets good press and additional support, then a day or two later, something negative appears. You can bet on it. Unfortunately, some people do not want to see him have a chance again, some of these people didn't want him to succeed the last time either. In other instances, it is operatives for other possible candidates orchestrating the innuendo and smears. I will say this, all powerful people have enemies,and Senator Kerry certainly has emerged as a powerful voice in our party.

[TayTay]

2. The News media tries to make news

out of little nothings. The stuff that former Sen. Edwards is saying about poverty and about there being Two Americas is stuff that Ted Kennedy has been saying all his life. It is not surprising to see agreement here or to see Sen. Kennedy sending out e-mails to support this type of agenda. There is little reason to read more into it than that. However, the Daily News is in the business of reading more into things than are actually there. That's what they do.

There will be a lot more of this in the days ahead. A lot more. The Democrats sense that '08 is a real opportunity to take back all the marbles so the infighting and jockeying for position will be awful. (It hasn't really begun yet, in a sense, although in another sense it is fully underway.) It will get ever so much worse. You ain't seen nothing yet. (Oh and Sen. Kennedy is 'with' Sen. Kerry. I havn't heard otherwise from anyone here.)

[Mass]

3. They did not come to that themselves. I agree with wisteria.

Some other potential candidate is behind this rumor. That was my point.

[TayTay]

8. I agree with you

And there will be a lot more of this. The 'prize' that these candidates are seeking is the biggest political office in the world. This is the Big Enchillada, there is no office more powerful in the entire world. Of course there will be things said by Dems to undermine other Dems. Of course there will be 'dirty tricks' although, in my opinion, this doesn't qualify as one of them. (Spreading the rumor that Kerry's cancer was not in remission in '03 was a dirty trick. Using a push-pull poll to do that was a dirty trick.)

These candidates have to try and distinguish themselves from the others. There will be a lot more of this type of press coverage. You ain't seen nothing yet, wait till after the midterms. It cannot be otherwise. Running for office is adversarial in nature, it is never going to be a tea party or a meeting of the mutual admiration society. It's about something and that will make the race strong, somewhat vitriolic and adversarial. How could it be otherwise?

[karynnj]

13. Do they know which candidate (or the Republicans)

tried the cancer trick?

[karynnj]

7. Do you have any examples of Kennedy speeches

on poverty/ two Americas etc? The Edwards' supporters constantly state that this issue was first expressed by Edwards. They somehow forget FDR, Kennedy and LBJ. The Kerner report also documented two Americas - in a more scholarly way than a focus group approved stump speech (and he didn't even have a stump!!). These are things Kennedy has said all his life - as did RFK.

I've posted the part of the Kerry NAFTA speech that explicitly says the same thing - while explaining some of the economics behind it. I love that speech - which I never would have seen if you hadn't posted it.

I do think it is jockeying for position. Edwards is clearing trying to position himself as someone everyone likes and respects - making him an alternative to Hillary.

[Mass]

9. Edwards is not the only one to speak about poverty, but he is one of

the few who do not hesitate to use the word in his speeches.

He is actually proposing exactly the same thing that Kerry and many others are proposing, but, by saying again and again that he addresses poverty, he seems to be doing more.

The ultimate problem is that what he and others are proposing is not really addressing poverty, but rather lower middle class people and solutions to help them not fall into poverty (which is great, but still not fighting to get people out of poverty). There seems to be a denial that some people are born poor and will stay poor because they are denied so many things from the beginning (early education, healthcare, ...). If you want to address these issues, it is time to address the real problems: housing, healthcare, early education and not college, minimum wage and minimum revenue, job opportunities: a way of lifting people out of poverty as well as preventing them to fall into poverty.

[fedupinBushcountry]

4. For one thing

that article is blown out of proportion, and Cutter sets it straight. Teddy is definitely for Kerry and that will not change.

IMO , yeah other Dems are afaid of another Kerry run, for deep down they know he won, as Vilsack, Warner and Bayh, are helping Secretary of States in key states http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-16-secretary-state-democrats_x.htm
they know he won, and they know he has a lot of support still out there.

[wisteria]

6. Interesting article. I just don't understand why it takes our party so

long to notice that Republicans have no sense of fairness or scruples when it comes to elections- their goal is to win one way or another. The 2000 decision should have been a rallying call then. I know I was appalled by Ms. Harris and her decisions.(And now, with her wanting to quickly move up the electoral ladder to success, it is apparent she thinks she is owed a Senatorship for her 2000 efforts).

[karynnj]

5. This is really making a lot out of very little

Kennedy has repeatedly said that he backs Kerry, but he has always been friendly to Edwards, who I think he involved on some of his legislation when he was in congress. Wasn't there some late 2003 suggestion in the press that he was backing Edwards then - floated either to help Edwards and hurt Kerry? Kennedy then, of course, appeared in Iowa with Kerry.

The nastier thing in this article is the comment that Kerry is trying to get Edwards not to run. That seems completely unlikely as it would make no sense - just as Kerry telling Hillary or Gore he would prefer they not run would make no sense.

Edwards has been an activist in support of Kennedy's push to raise the minimum wage. I am surprised that Kennedy has asked people to support Edwards' call on Iraq. Edwards' plan is not really a plan but some vague comments - Kennedy gives it credability and elevates its significance. (Edwards put it out after the Kerry/Feingold amendment and it calls for being out in 12 to 18 months. It has none of the datail and thought that Senator Warner complimented Kerry on - as he disagreed.)

Obviously this is to EDWARDS advantage - and he likely assured it's visibility. I wish Kennedy would have at least commented only on the minimum wage stuff that Edwards deserves credit on. Unfortunately this will be read as the liberal lion blessing Edwards as a liberal and some may even say he backs Edwards Iraq NON-PLAN over Kerry's PLAN. (Edwards is likely smart enough not to overplay this - which would lead to Kennedy explicitly endorsing Kerry again.)

[ProSense]

10. Exactly, and not suprising from a paper

that ran this editorial:

Snip...

It is no philosophically dishonorable thing to hold anti-war sentiments. But the Kerrys of Capitol Hill, and the Feingolds and the Murthas and the rest of them, have it backward with their cries that nothing but swift pullout can possibly ennoble the battered national soul. This crowd acts like it thinks President Bush really enjoys being in Iraq and lies awake nights thinking up new ways we can maybe stay there forever and ever.

more...

Wiser, but still misguided, were the Democrats who voted against date-certain pullout but urged the start of a phased withdrawal as 2006 draws to its close. Among them were New York's own Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer. Promoting a phased withdrawal, whatever that means, regardless of battlefield conditions might help with the political calendar. But militarily speaking, it's a laugher.

Not lost on us is the fact that Clinton was booed recently for failing to satisfy activists who would like nothing more than for her to personally drive a Humvee out of Baghdad. Regrettably, the war is a strictly politics issue in some quarters, but that is no surprise.

So congratulations to Congress for mustering the courage to pronounce the commitment to put down a horde of fanatic gangsters who would build a demented caliphate across the known world.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/429012p-361759c.html

[Democrafty]

11. Ted Kennedy is a lightning rod of cultural resentment

for the right, and even for some moderate Democrats I know.

So this might turn out not be the boon for Edwards that it looks like to those of us who actually value and respect what EMK has been doing for poverty and equal rights for decades now.

[whometense]

12. Dunno about this.

The only email I've received from Teddy today doesn't even mention Edwards. Maybe it went to a different list?

Dear whometense,

There are 146,587 terrorist supporters living in the state of Connecticut according to Vice President Dick Cheney -- the number of Ned Lamont voters.

He claims they're encouraging "the Al Qaida" types who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task" in Iraq.

Cheney's gone too far. His disgraceful declaration of war on Ned Lamont supporters is an attack not just on Democrats, but on democracy itself.

We can't stand by while Republicans like Cheney slander the people of Connecticut and millions of other Americans nationwide who are showing up at the polls to reject the failed record of the Bush Administration.

I thought you might like the opportunity to send your own message to the Vice President. You can send it here:

http://www.tedkennedy.com/apologize

Cheney wants people to believe that anyone who questions the Bush Administration's misguided policies is in cahoots with the terrorists.

But the facts are clear.

The Administration's extremist agenda has drained our resources and stretched our troops. This made the war on terrorism hard to win and made America more hated in the world.

The American people want more than vicious fear-mongering from our leaders. They want realistic policies, accountability for failures, and -- most of all -- a new direction for America.

It's time for Dick Cheney to admit he went too far. Demand that the vice president apologize for his offensive remarks:

http://www.tedkennedy.com/apologize

Let's recognize a few truths: Lamont voters did not allow Osama bin Laden to escape in the mountains of Afghanistan.

Lamont voters did not mislead the American people into war with Iraq.

Lamont voters did not refuse to admit their mistakes. They did not vow to "stay the course" while more and more Americans die and Iraq descends into civil war.

Dick Cheney and Republicans of his ilk disrespect the very nature of our democracy when the results are inconvenient for them. But despite this unprecedented grab for executive power, they don't have the ability to decide elections.

The vote in Connecticut proves that free and open elections still exist -- and millions of Democrats around the country are ready to go to the ballot box in the coming months and put America back on track.

Thank you for you support.

Sincerely,

Senator Edward M. Kennedy