Kerry blasts Bill Clinton for 'abusing truth'

[sabra]

Source: CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) — John Kerry, the Democratic Party's 2004 nominee for president, took aim at Bill Clinton Friday, telling the National Journal the former president does "not have a license to abuse the truth."

The Massachusetts senator, who endorsed Barack Obama's White House bid earlier this month, said Clinton's criticisms of the Illinois senator have been "over the top," and suggested the former president is getting "frantic."

Targeting Clinton's recent spate of attacks on Obama, Kerry said, "I think you had an abuse of the truth, is what happened. …I mean, being an ex-president does not give you license to abuse the truth, and I think that over the last days it's been over the top.

"I think it's very unfortunate, but I think the voters can see through that," Kerry added. "When somebody's coming on strong and they are growing, people get a little frantic, and I think people have seen this sort of franticness in the air, if you will."

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/25/kerry-blasts-bill-clinton-for-abusing-truth/

[jody]

1. Kerry is a loser. n/t

[tabasco]

34. You are a loser.

Kerry is a war hero.

[YvonneCa]

39. Sure is...

...:patriot:

[jody]

41. Sorry but Kerry lost the election for president and refused to fight the vote count. n/t

[mod mom]

51. Um...there is a difference between losing and having an election stolen. Where were the Clintons

in fighting for all the Af Am voters who were disenfranchised in 2000 & 2004? I guess it wasn't expedient for them to fight for those votes since it would have dampened Hillary's chances this year.

[jody]

59. It was up to Kerry and he alone to continue the fight. n/t

[mod mom]

73. Those were NOT Kerry's votes-they belonged to the Democrats who cast them

and the entire party including the Party leadership should have been supporting the fight for those voters. WHERE WERE THE CLINTONS? THEY WERE DEAFENINGLY SILENT.

[Unbowed]

68. Uh, they didn't have so much fight back then, come to think of it.

No, Bill Clinton wasn't out there crying foul in 2000 when his party needed him most. He certainly wasn't red-faced and irate in 2004 when lies and smears were paving the way to another four years of Hell for the American people. And where was Bill Clinton's outrage when Junior dropped the ball on Katrina? That suffering didn't elicit a strong response from our former President and party leader, but a political contest between his wife and another Democrat sure managed to get Bubba's dander up. I suppose it's hard to knock Junior over letting a few thousand folks suffer and die when you're tomcating around the world with Daddy.

[mod mom]

72. Exactly-he picks his fights with vested interest.

[Unbowed]

67. I second that. n/t

[mod mom]

49. Why don't you research on how Kerry worked on exposing BCCI. If you want to

acknowledge his "loss" then perhaps you should thank clinton's creepy crony carville:

Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)


By M.J. Rosenberg | bio




On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

-snip

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

-snip

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

[jody]

61. Still the facts are clear, Kerry lost and did not protest the vote count. n/t

[CANDO]

56. Clinton kool-aid drinkers are just so..........pre-schoolish.

Play nicely in that sand box! I'll say this again, so everyone gets it. Hillary gets our nomination, myself and my wife are not voting. A vote for a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a vote for a wolf. Wolf = Republican "Goldwater Girl".

[jody]

60. I see your point, if things don't go your way, then you quit playing.

[CANDO]

62. I would characterize it that my vote is too valuable to give to a fraud.

Why vote for a fraud and have to live with that? Haven't you ever wondered why Hillary Clinton seems to think she is owed the Presidency? Just because the right wing has savaged her for 15 years doesn't mean she qualifies for my vote. I think she makes for a nice Senator from NY, but I'd rather not have another Republican President with a "D" next to the person's name.

[jody]

64. IMO then you are not a member of the Democratic Party and that's OK. n/t

[elias7]

81. your responses in this thread are belligerent, childish & disrespectful

first you attack Kerry for no reason, then you attack other members of DU. Why not ignore the thread if you can toss in nothing but flame?

[jody]

82. If you don't like my posts, then don't read them. n/t

[elias7]

84. you sound like my teenager

[jody]

85. Sounds like your teenager is smarter than you. n/t

[elias7]

87. Smarter than you, too. Her comebacks have some wit...

[CANDO]

90. Jody, I'm a 19 year Teamster and a 5 Year Navy Veteran.

I think that qualifies me to be any damn thing I want to be within Democratic circles. What I really abhor, is the thought of another Clinton in the WH acting like a Democrat but implimenting Republican policies such as NAFTA, GATT, and any other pet GOP project. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice.....No F'king way!

[nolabels]

93. Local 495 here............

:woohoo:Go Cando, :woohoo:Go Cando,:woohoo: Go Cando,:woohoo: Go Cando, :woohoo: Go Cando, :woohoo: Go Cando, :woohoo: Go Cando, :woohoo: Go Cando, :woohoo:




P.S. many probably love the enthusiasm but no need in trying to pull too much rank here, like after all this supposed to be the Democratic Underground.

[CANDO]

94. Thanks nolabels.

I don't like it when a poster tells me I'm not a Democrat. Doesn't sit well. So I felt the need to point out my bona-fides. Being in the labor movement most of my adult life, I am well aware of the historical struggles of working folks. So it doesn't go over very easy to be told to fall into line with people who have already demonstrated they will sell out working folks. (NAFTA) Do people naively think Hillary would be any different than Bill?

[nolabels]

95. Just kinda kidding ya CANDO

In this fast paced world it seems like people only care for "what have you done for me lately". Which would bring HRC front and center with a big zero again. I more suspect the Bill Clinton sell out years were more of a 'in spite of' type of deal and that were really made possible by the people living here. It's not just the trade issues that Clinton negotiated away the Democratic position. It was also legal, domestic and even that ongoing siege practice on Iraq. Without the help of Clinton Iraq would have much less vulnerable to invasion / occupation by the *. Should we or should we not give self-professed liars their do? Like yea, all that baggage she is carrying around and then we should expect HRC to be this new and improved leader that is going to pull the troops out of there and then help negotiate new peace accords across the middle east. After so many years you start to understand when you are just getting lip service and track record really matters.

I personally don't take offense at someone questioning my credentials because sooner or later they will need me or someone like me. They will have to humble themselves to one degree or another when they need a something fixed. All that will not matter either though because i will still need my experience and knowledge make it happen. I will again be part a part of trendy idea of "what have you done for me lately". The poster known as "jody" obviously has succumbed to rigors of modern day stresses and knows not what to post to make for logical debate. I don't get angry at those kind of people, i just kind try to remember and wonder when i did much the same :-)

[ArfDogMNO]

96. I think it is an error to look at this in terms of R or D

"What I really abhor, is the thought of another Clinton in the WH acting like a Democrat but implimenting Republican policies such as NAFTA, GATT, and any other pet GOP project. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice.....No F'king way!"

The issue is one where the duopoly parties given the public some visible differences on social policies to keep us interested, but when it comes to major trade issues, ALL presidents post cold-war are corporatists, including all the remaining viable candidates from both parties for 2008.

R and D are just camoflauge. I would prefer G or N (globalists or nationalists) for trade issues.

[customerserviceguy]

66. Believe me,

it's going to happen on the other side, as well. There are Repukes who feel the same way about Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, and McCain. And one of them is going to end up with the Rethug nomination.

One thing that might unite them is to vote against Hillary, but that's just speculation on my part...although I have heard a number of wingnuts say that 'maybe Obama is not so bad, he seems to listen to people he disagrees with.'

Yes, its a long way until the election, and the religious right surely has enough time to demonize Obama to the people in the middle, but Hillary seems to have a head start in that direction.

[ArfDogMNO]

77. Re GOP disillusionment with their choices

"One thing that might unite them is to vote against Hillary, but that's just speculation on my part.."

I think a lot of the GOP base is unhappy with the remaining options, but they are going to get stuck with one.

You are right about a lot of folks simply not wanting a 3rd and 4th term for the Clintons, and being willing to vote for whomever for that reason alone. I would think a lot of Democrats are also disturbed by the control they have continued to exercise over the DNC the last 7 years, with the prospect of up to 24 total years of Clinton control of the party if they win 2 more terms.

More generally, the prospect of 28 years of bush/clinton/bush2/clinton is a disturbing statement on the condition of the republic.

Thoughts?

[ArfDogMNO]

97. Agreed

edited

I answered you twice lol, sorry

[protect our future]

2. Kerry is a man of great wisdom and integrity.

[liberalnurse]

11. And a quitter...loser as well.

Many moods of Swift boated Johnny.

[Diane R]

24. I always believed the Clinton machine had something to do with him not fighting Ohio '04.

I think that, behind the scenes, they were rallying their troops to not support his appeal of the voting tally in Ohio. I think they saw it as opening the window for Hillary in '08. I believe they were glad GWB won again so there would not be an incumbent in '08.

Anyways...I've just always had that feeling.

[mod mom]

52. yep see post 49 for how Clinton crony Carville helped undermine Kerry's strategy.

[MBS]

86. me, too

and watching their behavior in this primary strengthens that feeling.

[fascisthunter]

54. yuh... loserrrr man... burp! (nt)

[shaniqua6392]

3. I wish he would have fought for the Presidency

as hard as he is fighting for Obama. Just a thought.

[Captain Hilts]

6. Agreed. nt

[AX10]

4. Kerry let himself be swiftboated for a month before..

giving a paltry response.
Loser.

[YvonneCa]

19. Not true. Check this video...

... http://www.kerryvision.net/

Scroll down to Swiftboating video.

[Captain Hilts]

5. He's a loser who's bummed that surveys showed Bubba would have beaten him and W. nt

[thoughtanarchist]

7. Kerry is right.

...again.

And that was a ballsy move, btw.

One doesn't stick one's neck out to criticize the Clinton machine without expecting a few cranial bruises in the process.

[liberalnurse]

13. Now let's get real here.....

ballsy is really stretching the truth...............stick with a proud supporter or something on that line but ballsy............I reserve that for let's say, Edwards or even Kucinich and Sharpton can claim ballsy but not Kerry. ...sorry.

[thoughtanarchist]

16. As evidence of his ballsifides, note all the Kerry bashing in this thread.

The ballsy aspect of speaking truth to the Clinton machine is that you'll get the backlash from WITHIN the party as well as from the other side.

Of course you can think what you want, but there is no denying my sentiment.

[YvonneCa]

21. I agree...

...Kerry gets attacked for all sides when he takes a stand. And the media always takes the other side...or doesn't cover him at all.

[thoughtanarchist]

25. True.

Even in his home state criticism of him is harsh (though it's usually from conservative editorials, not from dems) and his accomplishments for the most part are not reported or go under-reported.

[protect our future]

57. Thoughtanarchist, may I please rip off your "ballsifides" and

use that term whenever appropriate?

Good one!

[thoughtanarchist]

58. I'm sure it won't hurt a bit! :-)

Be my guest... I'm sure you'll find at least one occasion in the future in which it may become necessary to enumerate a candidates' ballifications!

:rofl:

[LittleClarkie]

74. Ballsifides... heh

I LIKE it.

[protect our future]

14. A ballsy move, absolutely. And doubly ballsy to endorse Obama and

receive national attention for it. Since then, the Kerry endorsement has helped to secure other major Obama endorsements.

[YvonneCa]

22. That's because...

...the Senator is a true leader. :7

[Captain Hilts]

26. Can you use language more sexist? nt

[Captain Hilts]

27. You don't need 'balls' to have moral fortitude. nt

[thoughtanarchist]

32. I also don't literally need a silver tongue to speak eloquently.

But I do not expect the speech police to come after me when I use these expressions.

Because I am not racist or sexist I don't feel the need to be super-sensitive and self censoring with my speech to prove anything to myself or anyone else.

That OK with you?

[Captain Hilts]

47. Why needlessly piss off people?

That's awfully white of you!

[thoughtanarchist]

50. Why needlessly get pissed off?

Life is too short to get all uptight over language that is a common to our discourse.

btw, it offends me that you are advancing the stereotype of the ultra-sensitive liberal enforcing your brand of political correctness on the world. Rush Limbaugh says thanks for the ammunition.

It's a friggin' word.

Can ya get over it?

:think:

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. Thank you Senator Kerry; however I wish you had fought a bit

harder back in '04, but you are absolutely right about WJC.

[Mend]

36. he does a louder job against a fellow Democrat than repukes....interesting,

that.

[YvonneCa]

44. That probaly has more to do with...

...the media's love of covering (ad nauseum) any catfights or smackdowns in the horserace, for the purpose of ratings and MONEY. :)

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. agreed..........n/t

[Tarc]

9. Funny that the Campaign of Sour Grapes

Has brought bitterest of the bunch on-board.

[MADem]

10. More poor judgment. He took money from Rezko, too!!! nt

[Doctor_J]

12. It seems there are other things much more in need of blasting today

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3156446

WTF are these Dems thinking about???

[Bitwit1234]

15. You are 100% correct not only a looser a whipped puppy dog looser

someone who did not have the guts to fight back for the American people who choose him to run against bush. They were sure fooled weren't they. I did not speak to my sister for six months because she voted for Kerry over Dean.

[YvonneCa]

18. Are former Dean supporters...

...still Democrats? Just wondering...

[YvonneCa]

17. After reading this thread...

...I wonder if there are really Democrats on DU. We won't need to worry about Republicans defeating us if we defeat ourselves.

I just wish there was less 'attacking our own' and more 'research ways Kerry continues to fight' around here. Kerry's endorsement and support for Obama is a continuation of his life-long fight on our Democratic issues.

John Kerry is not the enemy. I wish he had had the information and court support to complete a REAL recount in Ohio in 2004, too...but he didn't. We really needed him as President. I'm grateful every day that he didn't just fade away into the woodwork. He never stopped fighting...just changed his tactics (something Bush never learned how to do, by the way :7 ).


Thanks, Senator!:patriot:

[LaloBorges]

31. Well said but...

that should go for Kerry as well, he should keep his mouth shut as if Hillary wins the nomination then his current "fight" will have not produced anything positive.

You also have to wonder why Kerry did not support Edwards as he was his running mate in 2004, and why Edwards seems to do the right thing and ignore Kerry. Sometimes I think that the final days between Kerry and Edwards did not go well and Kerry's support for Obama is more of a payback to Edwards than real appreciation for "Hope" and "Change".

And again, is it "'Hope' that things 'Change'"?

[YvonneCa]

35. I disagree that anyone...

...including John Kerry, should keep their mouth shut when ugly political tactics are used. In a letter to supporters, Kerry stated, "The truth matters, but how you fight the lies matters even more." I think that is what he is trying to do. If Hillary Clinton gets the nomination, I am sure he will continue to speak out about 'how you fight the lies' during the general election. I think his fight WILL produce something positive if it leads the country to change our politics for the better. I posted this on another thread:



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I think it is Rovian political tactics: Exploiting a known division (existing gender bias, racism, position on abortion, etc.) in order to win. It's what Karl Rove excelled at, and helped Bush (and many others) to do. The Clintons (who I think have been and can be great leaders) are using these 'tried and true'...but now old politics...strategies to win. Kerry and Obama share the new philosophy that the politics of division are wrong and they hurt the country, and they are calling the Clintons on it (which I'm sure the Clintons don't like).

For me, the main reason we need to do away with Rovian tactics is their divisiveness...which lasts long beyond any primary or general election, and keeps the country from uniting afterward to solve our problems...leading to gridlock. The many years of Rovian tactics hurt the country, they hurt the candidates, they hurt the groups singled out, they hurt our Democratic party (and the media LOVE the show, and make money covering it instead of issues)...and they hurt people like us who want to respect our former President...who was a good (not perfect) President...and don't want to give help to Republicans who have always enjoyed and made sport out of trashing him. We all lose with Rovian politics.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And, for what it's worth, I don't have a candidate yet. :)

[karynnj]

89. If she wins the nomination it is important that she stop this

as it is turning off many blacks, young people and liberals.

He endorsed Obama who he sees as the one with the best chance to make real change. Edwards himself said he and Obama are both for change but he sees confrontation as needed - not conciliation. By Edwards own description he is far from Kerry's position. In 2004, Edwards did not speak of this. Also, Edwards cut off conversation with Kerry and he and Elizabeth have attacked the Kerrys - who did not return the comments in kind.

Why would Kerry endorse someone who is pushing a method for change he disagrees with who attacks him and doesn't speak to him? Not to mention one who was such an egotist he refused to use the campaign slogan? Kerry did Edwards a favor making him VP. Why do you think Kerry owes him anything?

[fascisthunter]

55. Thank You.....

they sound republican to me.

[YvonneCa]

63. ...

...:)

[LulaMay]

20. He isn't helping the party. His resentment of Pres. Clinton is long standing. We don't need it.

We have to be able to unite for our candidate after this primary, and the relentless Clinton bashing isn't going to help us.

We all know he's never appreciated Bill Clinton.

I supported Kerry and voted for him in the primary, but really, can't he stop with the long winded, angry speeches for one minute?

[YvonneCa]

23. Not until our troops...

...are out of Iraq.

johnkerry.com

[knight_of_the_star]

91. Clinton is the one being the problem here

He isn't helping the party with his scorched-earth politics.

[shenmue]

28. Is that why Bill Clinton was elected twice?

What is it with the Clinton-bashing? You sound exactly like Ken Starr.

[BlueIris]

92. Diebold is real. So is media corruption. Get informed. nt

[Baby Snooks]

29. The pictures worth a thousand words...

The pictures are everywhere. The Bush dynasty. With its adopted children. Bill and Hillary. A vote for a Clinton is a vote for a Bush. But most will vote for her. And then act appalled to find they have another Bush in the White House. PT Barnum knew the American voter well when he said "there's a sucker born every minute."

I don't think any of the candidates really would bring any change. Seems the Bush extended family is quite extended. Like an evil octopus whose tentacles have devoured this country from coast to coast.

Money doesn't buy happiness. But it does buy politicians and their parties. And both parties have been bought. And the American people have been sold out. But keep waving the flags believing it isn't so.

[LaloBorges]

33. WRONG!!!!

There will never be another G. W. Bush, I have to believe that is impossible...Isn't the saying that lightning does not strike twice in the same place?

If the country does not learn from this experience then...

[superconnected]

30. At this point the only hope is John Edwards.

[YvonneCa]

37. No, the only hope is...

...the American people. We have a responsibility to pay attention, research our information on candidates, and vote. If we had done that in large numbers (I know 'some' did) in 2000 and 2004, things would be different today. We can't just say, 'X' is the hope...and then if they don't win...give up. NOT okay, IMHO.

[Generator]

38. Even when Kerry bashes it's lame!

Franticness in the air, if you will. Oh God.

[YvonneCa]

40. I like intelligent speakers...

...especially after 4 years of 'you-know-who'.

[KDLarsen]

42. How exactly does one 'abuse the truth'?

Is Kerry telling Clinton to keep quiet because people might actually listen to him, or what is the story here?

.. and yeah, I agree with what was said further up the thread, the last thing the Democratic Party need is a major infigght between two of its most popular figures. The primary goal of 2008 must be to get a Democrat in the White House & maintain a majority in both chambers, and so far they're only making it easier for the Repubs to oppose that, by delivering plenty of negative stories for them to work with. I'm not saying we need to paint a rose red picture of harmony, but we need to present a united front against the right.

[marshall]

43. It's a euphemism

Obama used a similar one the other day. They don't want the soundbite out there that has them actually calling Clinton a bold faced liar so they resort to parsing words.

[YvonneCa]

46. Often by only telling part of the truth...

...and giving no context. I heard Bill Clinton say something (paraphrasing) the other day about being truthful on the specifics...I think he meant to choose language carefully, so as to not actually lie.

That's why I like what Kerry said. "The truth matters, but how you fight the lies matters even more."

I also like your words: "I'm not saying we need to paint a rose red picture of harmony, but we need to present a united front against the right." I completely agree.

Here's a link to more on Kerry's position: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/23/16935/0738/503/441894

[MBS]

78. thanks, YvonneCa n/t

[YvonneCa]

83. You are MOST welcome...

...MBS. Anytime. :7

[Ian David]

45. If Kerry is so concerned about truth, why did he vote to certify the votes in 2000 and 2004? n/t

[LittleClarkie]

69. He wasn't even in town in 2004

was he?

[indimuse]

48. "Abusing the TRUTH!" WTF!!!!

I'm having a hard time assimilating that phrase..I think..tell me if I'm wrong..wouldn't it be worse to LIE!? Abuse a LIE... like let's say...Knowingly allow a Lie to circulate about your opponent.. just enough to gain some votes...then admit ..what you knew all along..was a LIE! Abusing a LIE seems a whole lot more News worthy... don't ya think...Hey ED Shultz if you read this ..F*ck off!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

70. Only Kerry.

Unbelievable.

[Frances]

65. Kerry's comments hurt whoever wins the nomination in the general

Kerry should work to calm things down, not stir them up. That is, if he really wants a Dem in the White House.

[onyxred]

71. Clinton has huge lead over Obama in Mass. despite Kerry's endorsement

It looks like voters didn't give Kerry's endorsement of Obama too much weight.

[TankLV]

75. the "truth" simply is just - the TRUTH

too bad it bites because the record shows that the TRUTH is NOT on obama's side!

reality is a bitch, isn't it!!!

[Seabiscuit]

76. Aw, go take a long walk off a short pier, Mr. Kerry. You've disgusted me for

over 5 years now. Friggin' bullshit gasbag.

[mikekohr]

79. The Food fight Had Better Stop. -QUICKLY-

It is not only Democrat national leaders like Kerry, Kennedy, Leahy, Daschle, Clyburn, ect., etc., etc., that are calling for a toning down of the discourse between our two front runners, Senators Clinton and Obama. Buzz.Flash.com reported that both President Clinton and Senator Clinton have said they may have went to far in the fight with Senator Obama.

Anyone that feels that any of our three candidates for President are not qualified or ready to assume the Presidency is wrong or to personally involved to offer an objective opinion. And any Democrat that thinks we are going to win the White House with this kind of nonsense going on is blowing smoke up their own ass. EVERY Democratic activist I talk and work with, regardless of whom they support, are worried sick over this turn in the campaign.

With the most favorable political wind in 70 years at our backs, we stand poised to make substantial gains in the House and Senate this fall. But we can lose the White House, yet again, and diminish the scope of our Congressional gains if this division and diversion continues.

[RadiationTherapy]

80. Is this a seedling of Obama/Kerry 2008?? n/t

[Rockerdem]

88. What it's jeopardizing ...

What purpose do comments outside of the issues serve? Issue-oriented differences in campaigns are always used after the convention by the other party. Bush's dad really hurt Raygun temporarily with "voodoo economics." But what would happen this year if escalation of personal bad blood remarks between BO and HRC goes too far? Basically, it eliminates the chance of the loser serving as VP.

Bill Clinton dissing Obama as only just another Jesse Jackson (ie, simply a symbolic civil rights figure who won a primary or two, trading on his minority base) is downright insulting. It's also a falsehood, because Obama has crossover voters going for him.

Worse, the Pukes are going to have a field day with this fodder come the fall, either if BO wins the primaries or was chosen for VP. Right now, the later is becoming just about out of the question because of those weird comments. A major gaffe which speeds up the flow of blood to near-hemorrhage state.