The Sunday Talk shows: Stephanopoulos has Sen. Kerry on the show

[TayTay]

Sen Kerry will be a guest on the This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. Check listings in your area for local broadcast times.

[JI7]

1. great

i think JK should be careful in some of the words he might use to answer questions because there are people out there right now who will take anything out of context to hurt Kerry or anyone he is associated with politically. of course this always happens, but this is a special time.

[karynnj]

2. I agree, but that has been the case for Kerry at least since 2004

The fact is that he has said far more than anyone else - giving them little to use against him. (I doubt anyone else would have have the guts and the ability to bring up the real problems - to our troops as well as the Iraqis - of us doing the search and destroy missions and getting that out was critical. There's a reason that so many Democrats were nearly using Kerry's words on Iraq and terrorism - they had been already used, tested and they avoided minefields. Obama and the Democratic party need surrogates out there now - and no one has done a better job than he has. (The only hit had to cut him mid-sentence, because if the sentence was finished - it didn't say what the idiots wanted to imply it did. Now - in a gotcha show, he knows how to deal with that - bring the entire quote -take out his glasses and read it.)

It would be easier for him to avoid these shows, avoid endorsing and just battle the fierce :sarcasm: opposition for his Senate seat. Tay Tay had it right a couple of weeks ago when she quoted a friend's signature - saying something like ships are safer in the harbor, but that's not what they are made for - and adding that it applied to Kerry.

[Mass]

3. True, as we can see in this article. Nothing wrong in what Kerry said, but you can see

the derisiveness in the AP article.

Still, he is right. A president that cannot recognize his errors is a catastrophy.

http://www.meadvilletribune.com/election2008/local_story_088132145.html?keyword=secondarystory

[beachmom]

4. Thanks for the link, Mass. I LOVED that article. I've been watching

"John Adams" on HBO, and it really has been eye opening to see the Founders "come to life" with all of their flaws as well as their greatness. I see where we get the "keep your powder dry" expression from -- there were anti-war leaders in the Continental Congress who wanted to avoid war with Britain, hoping things would work out. They wanted to "keep our powder dry", and, btw, were annoyed with Mass. for causing so much trouble. Then there was the slavery question -- there was Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson matter of factly saying, "Of course slavery is an abomination", but gee, the politics weren't there to end it, so let's forget about that issue!! I mean really lame.

I actually thought the article was good and showed Kerry in a good light. I like this part:

Nuance is not a word Americans associate with strong leadership. But Kerry called it the essence of the presidency. For example, he said, U.S. policy on China and Taiwan is parsed to make sure Taiwan isn’t encouraged to declare its independence and China isn’t tempted to invade.

“That ambiguity is, in effect, the policy, with a purpose,” Kerry said.

Kerry noted that Ronald Reagan wasn’t criticized for condemning the Soviets’ so-called evil empire while turning a blind eye toward other Communist regimes.

And then there’s the matter of the U.S. Constitution and slavery, a blatant bit of flip-floppery.

“Slavery was written into the Constitution before it was written out,” Kerry said with a wry grin, before paraphrasing his infamous remark on war funding. “So America was for it before we were against it.”

[TayTay]

7. The "John Adams" show is good and informative

of our own history. Americans tend to be taught their history as one glorious undertaking from start to finish in which the angels intervened and the American Republic sprang to life with divine inspiration. Not so. There was a scene in John Adams that was nuanced by the writers to show a particular point of view. Mr. Adams did indeed courageously defend those 8 British soldiers in the aftermath of the so-called "Boston Massacre." (This event was, btw, a chapter in John F. Kennedy's Pulitzer Prize winning book, Profiles in Courage written in the late 1950's.)

The Sons of Liberty, and Mr. Adams' cousin Samuel Adams, were very happy to have John Adams defend those soldiers. That defense never would have taken place without the implied consent of the Patriot forces in Boston. John Adams could be trusted to let the testimony go only so far and no farther. There was great risk to the Patriot cause that the "Boston Massacre" would be revealed as a work of a mob-ocracy run amuck. It was critical to the Patriot cause that this case be "handled" well, that it show that Colonial justice was not a fraudulent term, but that certain personages not get "mud" thrown on them by a trial that would reveal all the sins of Boston. The other lawyer in the trial, the consumptive Mr. Josiah Quincy, was on the verge of getting certain "names" in the public eye and Mr. Adams dialed him back from this. This trial was the essence of a political event and one that was incredibly well-managed from the Patriot side. The movie John Adams does not show this side of the trial or the brilliance with which justice was done, but political damage was also contained. Had this trial been badly handled, we might never have had the Revolution in the years after this because the reputation of the Patriot side would have been irretrievably broken.

(Those of you who have been on my Wicked Good Tours of Boston will remember that I pause at the statue of Samuel Adams outside Faneuil Hall and often refer to that gentleman as the Karl Rove of his day. He was. Samuel Adams was about the goal. The means to that goal and it's moral implications were of a much lesser concern to him. There were a lot of things done to bring about American Independence that were not rosy and glorious. But they were done. That mattered to some, but not at all to others. So it is in this day as well.)

The TV show is showing one thing about the American character brilliantly. We have ingrained in our nature a desire to compromise and "split the difference" in a debate. Winston Churchill once remarked that, "you can count on the Americans to do the right thing, but only after they have exhausted all other possibilities." I think the drama on the John Adams show highlights this as a trait that Americans have always have. Yes, we favor diplomacy and finding common ground. It is a part of our national character. But sometimes you have to wonder, at what cost? The debate on slavery was, at it's heart, insoluble. We could not compromise our way out of it. We tried for nearly 85 years to do so and failed miserably. In the end, this "infamous practice" was ended by war. (War is defined as the failure of politics.) It is something to contemplate from time to time in the world. Americans do actually believe that we can negotiate our way into and out of predicaments. We can split the difference and find common ground. Sometimes, I don't think the rest of the world agrees. They see the insoluable and unarguable and get frustrated that we want all that "stuff" to just go away. Others nations do not have a history of debate and compromise, their histories are vastly different. I think sometimes we would be well-served to remember that before we act. (Iraq comes to mind. We cannot compromise our way out of Iraq. Their history is not ours, their way of looking at things is not ours, etc.)

[ginnyinWI]

25. JK and John Adams

I read the book that the HBO series is based on shortly after the 2004 election, and kept seeing similarities between JK and Adams. I thought it must be the New England Puritan values or something, passed down to JK from his forebears. But he's got 'em, same as Adams had. The book contrasts Adams with Jefferson, showing Adams to be much more apt to put his principles into action--for example in refusing to hold slaves, where Jefferson did. And living according to his means, while Jefferson was always in debt. Stuff like that. Much to be admired in John Adams, as the series is showing. Not to mention being brilliant, like so many MA politicians past and present!

Remember when we in this group were all watching the C-span video of JK visiting Nashua? During his talk that day,as the video showed, he actually mentioned McCullough's book on John Adams. And I felt good.

I actually added HBO to our DishTV lineup just for this series, and intend to cancel after it's over. Well worth it.

[Democrafty]

27. I'm reading the book now, and I totally agree.

Every day, it seems, we learn so much about the ugliness in politics, and JK remains Mr. Clean. I feel the same way about Adams - he made some serious mistakes, but he always lived his values. It's also both comforting and frustrating to see how little the political system has changed over 200+ years!

[MBS]

28. yes, I've been thinking about this a lot lately, and it's not

commented on enough by the Talking Heads. John Kerry is the very definition of integrity, a stunning ;-) and inspiring contrast to politicians-as-usual. In 2004, this was barely mentioned. To this day, I feel that not enough people realize what a treasure he is, in this and many other qualities.

[karynnj]

5. I agree with Beachmom this is a very good article

The AP snark at the beginning looks witless next to the Kerry examples. I like that he explains things incredibly well, but he continues to refuse to make everything black or white when it isn't - his statement on the Chinas was concise and insightful.

[MBS]

6. ooh-- and he's debating Ed Rendell!

as surrogates for BO and HRC respectively. This should be good :popcorn:
Also, Lieberman will be talking about McCain. That might have its own entertainment value :evilgrin:

[wisteria]

8. This is going to be a must see. n/t

[JI7]

9. that should be interesting, remember Rendell doesn't like Kerry

criticized him throughout 2004 and after.

[Inuca]

10. Criticized about what? n/t

[JI7]

31. criticizing the campaign rather than supporting Kerry

and after 2004 made a bunch of comments about how Kerry is a bad candidate and we need someone like Tom Vilsack.

[Fabio]

12. I dont remember Rendell being critical in 2004

maybe after, but that's slightly different IMHO

[globalvillage]

13. Good stuff. I just re-watched it.

JK and Rendell are both good Dems. I think Sen Kerry did better than Rendell.

The Gov. may be in Hillary's corner now, but he will support Obama when he's the nominee, count on it.

I had to mute the TV when Lieberman came on.

[beachmom]

14. When you or ABC get a video up, can you post it here? I forgot

to watch it.

[MH1]

24. Video is up at ABC

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4552433

JK was great. :D (Compare JK's body language and expressions with Joe Sestak's recent Hardball appearance lamely trying to defend Hillary on the Bosnia fib. Joe is having second thoughts, I am sure...as he should.)

[beachmom]

32. Thanks, MH1. Kerry was great, and he would not allow himself to

be sucked into the petty stuff that has plagued the primary campaign for the last few weeks. He took a pass on the "sniper fire" story (although funny, it's kind of silly compared to her s-chip embellishment, which is truly substantive), and stuck to her unfavorable poll numbers. He was great pointing out Obama's line "security gap" and that Hillary's healthcare plan is a nonstarter in the Senate. I agree with everyone else. He would be a fantastic president. He's still #1 for me.

[YvonneCa]

17. I agree...

...and Kerry did very well. I immediately turned the TV off when Joe L. was up. :7

[MBS]

11. I thought JK was very good

His barely suppressed smile at certain points was a particular favorite. His almost-smile seemed to say, "I know what the game is here, and I know the deeper truth, and I'll be diplomatic when appropriate, but I won't lie."

[wisteria]

15. He wiped the floor with Rendell, who didn't seem to offer HIS candidate an enthusiastic endorsement

as Senator Kerry did Obama. Highlight for me, the mention of Hillary going to the Scaife paper, The Tribune Review. Go Kerry! I am sorry he isn't running- damn he would make an excellent president. Obama is good to though.

[fedupinBushcountry]

18. I agree

When they first showed Rendell he looked like he was defeated before he even started, his look was not of enthusiasm. I agree about the Hillary bringing up the Reverend in the Scaife paper and liked how he threw in of all places. I also liked the fact that JK brought to knowledge that HRC's healthcare plan did not have a chance for passing in the Senate, if anyone should know about how the healthcare legislation is going in the Senate it is JK and Teddy.

He would make an excellent president, but Obama will have a great advocate in his corner when he gets to the WH.

[wisteria]

20. Yes, the health care comments were great.

And, I realize the campaign is about Obama, but the majority of my loyalties still are with Sen. Kerry. I respect what he has to say above all else. Senator Obama is truly lucky to have Senator Kerry as an advocate.

[fedupinBushcountry]

21. You are not alone

He is very lucky to have JK on his side.

[MBS]

22. yes, JK was very very good the way he introduced the Hillary-Scaife

interview. You barely noticed he was going into attack mode (the only warning being the smile that preceded his remarks. : )) Very smooth, very civil, and right to the target.

[wisteria]

16. A comment from Kerry from the program this morning.

Kerry targets McCain and 'Republican disaster'


"Hillary Clinton has every right in the world to continue to fight, but the important thing is to be fighting against John McCain," Kerry told ABC's "This Week," discussing some calls for Sen. Clinton to drop out of the race.

"It is very important for both people to keep the eye on the real target — John McCain and the Republican disaster of the last seven and a half years," he added."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/30/kerry-targets-mccain-and-republican-disaster/">link

[wisteria]

19. Concesnsus coming in the next few weeks? Something else from the interview this morning.

"I think that the superdelegates ought to decide early. I would even say earlier than July,” Kerry said on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos. “As a former nominee, I will tell you, this time right now is critical to us.”

In a week in which two prominent supporters of the Illinois senator, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) have suggested Clinton should drop out of the race, Kerry said it is not up to the Obama campaign to tell the former first lady to end her pursuit of the nomination. However, the 2004 nominee indicated that he believes that there will be a “consensus about it, and I think it’s going to occur over these next weeks.”


http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/kerry-urges-superdelegates-to-pick-before-july-2008-03-30.html">link

[MBS]

23. I am sure that the Senate Dems are orchestrating some sort of

strategy on this.

By the way, I agree with all the remarks on this thread about what a great president Kerry would have been. . sigh.

[MarjorieG]

26. What does it say that her co-workers are so pro-Obama?

So many favorite points and zingers, as a Kerry interview always produces. Like when he said about Rendell that it's better to have him on your side than against "I can tell you" with a sly acknowledgment to those who know, that Rendell was critical of Kerry and unhelpful throughout in 2004. Also part of the Hillary 2008 team?

Just like Bill barely mentioned Kerry on the book tour but touted Bush, Bill is still trumpeting McCain as centrist, Maverick, and many other media sound bytes we need to dispel. In the same week Hillary said the differences too great, vote Democratic, and played endlessly on TV. Why? Leadership of the party, protecting his legacy more important than a Dem win?

[MBS]

29. to answer your question: " a lot" : )

Oh, yes, JK was so sly-- that comment on Rendell was just beautifully done. This guy is totally on a roll: what a joy to watch his confident, impish joy these days.

[beachmom]

30. As Fabio mentions upthread, do you guys have links of what

Rendel said back in 2004 (prior to the November election)? I hadn't heard about him being critical of JK in 2004.

[wisteria]

33. I don't recall any negative comments during the 2004 election. I do recall one or two afterwards,

which I wrote the Governor about. His comments suggested a poor campaign and candidate.

[whometense]

34. According to the WSJ,

Via Al Giordano, Amy Klobuchar endorses Obama tomorrow, so you may be onto something.

Slowly but steadily, a string of Democratic Party figures is taking Barack Obama's side in the presidential nominating race and raising the pressure on Hillary Clinton to give up.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota is expected to endorse Sen. Obama Monday, according to a Democrat familiar with her plans. Meanwhile, North Carolina's seven Democratic House members are poised to endorse Sen. Obama as a group -- just one has so far -- before that state's May 6 primary, several Democrats say...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120692054573175525.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news

[Inuca]

38. Nice!!!

And the NC house members even nicer than Klobuchar.

[sandrakae]

35. I just watched it. I'm leaning towards Hillary, but I love Senator Kerry.

I would walk 10 miles in knee deep snow to cast a vote for John Kerry. This makes this election very difficult for me, because I am still so undecided. I live in PA so my primary vote is actually going to count. No matter which candidate wins the nomination they get my vote in the general.

[wisteria]

36. I agree with you on Senator Kerry. I am supporting Obama and I live in Pa too, but

like you, I will vote for whomever our nominee is over McCain.

[beachmom]

39. I agree with you as well. I voted for Obama in GA and like him a lot,

but I will vote for the Democrat in November. And John Kerry is still the best president we could ever have in this era.

[Dr Ron]

37. Brief Post at Liberal Values on Kerry's Appearance on This Week--Has Link to Video

From Liberal Values:

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=3089

On one of today’s battles of the surrogates John Kerry backed Barack Obama while Ed Rendell backed Hillary Clinton on This Week. Kerry made many good points in favor of Obama. On health care, Kerry noted that “Hillary Clinton’s plan in the United States Senate is a non-starter because it starts with a mandate which is unachievable in the United States Senate.” Kerry had also rejected mandates when developing his 2004 health care plan. The video is available here.

The link to the video is:

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4552433&affil=wzzm

[MBS]

40. comment on JK from Obama website

in the blog, under (March 31) morning news

By Jacqueline O'Boomer 28 minutes ago
I agree Sen. Kerry was GREAT yesterday! He needs to get around the Sunday shows as much as he can, especially with Teresa Heinz Kerry's big draw in the Pittsburgh area. Love them both.