Obama to Kerry: "I'm here because of you."

[babylonsister]

nice article about Senator Kerry here...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1917460,00.html

snip//


By then it was clear that Kerry's 2004 run left at least one enduring mark on American politics. On the wall of Kerry's office hangs his invitation to President Obama's Inauguration. In the center of the glass is a handwritten note from Obama. It reads, "I'm here because of you." Kerry, of course, had picked Obama to deliver the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention — the speech that launched Obama into superstardom. Kerry decided to endorse Obama in late 2007 and went public in early 2008.

snip//

Kerry has also emerged as a problem solver on health care. The Obama Administration had rejected Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus' idea to tax some health-care benefits because it would raise taxes on the middle class. When Baucus' panel came up $320 billion short of paying for its proposed reforms, Kerry suggested taxing insurers that offer high-end plans — those worth more than $9,000 a year for individuals or $25,000 a year for families — in order to raise $145 billion. It was an idea that he and then New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, among others, had pioneered in 1994. When Kerry dusted it off this summer, unions balked, since many of their plans are worth as much as $25,000 a year. He convened some of the more vocal opponents last month. "I'm doing what Teddy Kennedy would do ... I'm finding a compromise to get a bill passed," he told the group. Kerry didn't win them over, but they did pledge not to oppose the proposal.

But it is as Foreign Relations chairman that Kerry has become most influential. A relationship with Syrian President Bashar Assad, forged in 2005, helped Kerry play the key role in thawing U.S.-Syrian relations after the White House renewed Bush-era sanctions on Damascus in May. With Lugar, he shepherded a $1.5 billion nonmilitary-aid package to Pakistan last spring. His support is also vital to Obama's surge strategy in Afghanistan; though he voted to send more troops earlier this year, Kerry now wonders whether the Administration has a clear agenda there. "I'm very concerned about Afghanistan's footprint," he says. "The breadth of challenges that we face there, with police, with governance, corruption, narcotics, tribalism, other kinds of things ... may be well beyond the narrower definition the President gave the mission." Kerry plans to hold hearings in the fall, in part to force the White House to clarify its goals.

more...

[sasquatch]

1. I have problems with that quote.

I just do, but I do think its very diplomatic.

[karynnj]

15. Even if you look just at the speech Kerry gave him it's reasonable

The victory was Obama's, but the fact is that the help of many people's was necessary and it requires the luck of being in the right place, with the right stuff at the right time. The fact is that Kerry met Obama, because a Chicago businessman, with a vacation home in Nantucket, who was Kerry's national finance person, told him about Obama. Kerry saw Obama, was impressed and the rest is history. The Chicago businessman is now the Ambassador to London. It is very hard to argue that Obama, without that speech would have done enough in 2 years in the Senate to gain the visibility needed. You could also credit Dick Durbin for suggesting he run.

In addition, Kerry's endorsement was important and Kerry's excellent work as Obama's top surrogate in the primaries was important. The Clinton numbers in states like NJ, MA, CA, and NY, superTuesday states in early January, even after Iowa, were high enough that she would have gotten huge landslides, getting the lion's share of the delegates and becoming the presumptive nominee. As that nearly happened, it is very hard to rule out significant support as not needed. I suspect that Kerry"s and Kennedy's endorsements helped at least some who questioned if he was ready make the jump. After 2004, I also think having really good surrogates is important - and Kerry stopped a lot of Bill Clinton's attacks by strongly refuting them.

So, there are at least 3 things Kerry did for him; the opportunity of the speech, the early endorsement, and his work as a surrogate.

[politicasista]

21. Guess some people have a problem with

Obama praising Kerry for some reason. Interesting.

Their problem, not ours.

:hi:

[goclark]

40. I love it!

[politicasista]

43. Yep.

I love it too. :hi:

[_dynamicdems]

34. You're so right.

The early endorsement gets forgotton and his work as a surrogate for Obama goes unrecognized by most people.

:hi:

[StevieM]

41. Kerry didn't refute anything. He lied about and smeared our fine former president (eom)

[karynnj]

42. Kerry refuted what Clinton said and a large number of people believed Kerry

One thing Clinton said in that "fairy tale" comment was that Obama in 2004 said that he would do what Bush was doing going forward. The Clinton people backed this up by an Obama statement saying that the goal was a stable Iraq. They ignored the rest of his comment which was how he thought we could do that - which was what Kerry was proposing.. Obama was a surrogate for Kerry.

What Clinton did was what Rove did in 2004. He purposely ignored that, as Kerry said, there was NOTHING he would do in the same way; ignored that he spoke of regional diplomacy and internationalizing the effort to remove the American face etc - to say that Kerry wanted to do what Bush did. I would bet that Kerry found Clinton's comment obnoxious. (It was CLINTON on his book tour, who criticized the left (and implicitly Kerry) for disagreeing with Bush's policies in Iraq.)

Clinton could have limited himself to speaking of the similarity of their 2005 - 2008 votes. Obama should have voted for Kerry/Feingold, but it was the Clinton wing of the party that reviled Kerry for sponsoring it. Even though within 9 months, Hillary was using the logic and words Kerry used in summer 2006 and pushing a plan that contained most of the elements of Kerry/Feingold.

The fact is that HRC likely would have won the nomination if Bill Clinton did not make this and other unfounded accusations. I really think that Obama needed to run both an exceptional campaign AND for the Clintons to do something wrong. Had they stayed a high road, above the fray campaign, the inevitable would have happened. Until a few days after the first Philly debate where HRC made a little misstep on the Spitzer question, I thought HRC was the inevitable nominee. It was not the answer, but the brittle reaction. HRC speaking at Wellesley about the guys against the girl and Bill Clinton speaking of swiftboating! Once Obama became a threat, the Clintons used the former President as an attack dog, likely thinking no one would counter him in the Democratic party. Obama was very lucky to have one of the few people with both the gravitas and guts to do so. Without Kerry, Obama would have had to engage him himself - which could have hurt his image.

Clinton was President and Kerry never will be, but Kerry has far more integrity and is by far the more honest person.

[StevieM]

44. Oh so now the fairy tale remark was about the Iraq War after all? That's interesting.

Back in 08 we were told it was a racial remark.

It amazes me that you see a difference of opinion as a lie. To compare Clinton to Karl Rove is grotesque.

Obama presented himself as an early outspoken opponent of the war--he wasn't and that was Clinton's point. There were people who we know would have been against the War had they been in the Senate--Al Gore, Martin O'Malley, etc. Obama said he didn't know how he would have voted.

Karyn, do you honestly believe that Obama would have voted against the War? I don't believe for a minute that he would have done so. If Durbin voted for it, then Obama would have likely voted for it. This is a man who abandoned us on FISA....who voted present repeatedly in the state legislature. Who skipped Kyl/Lieberman. I doubt that he would have opposed the Iraq War had he been in the Senate at the time.

Steve

[karynnj]

45. Wrong on many counts

First off, it is NOT a difference of opinion that Obama had the same plan as Bush. Did Bush have a regional summit? Did Bush preclude permanent bases? Did Bush call for moving the US out of the front lines? Did Bush speak of pulling in the neighboring countries? The Kerry plan was NOT the Bush plan - the media PROVED they knew it wasn't when they said the ISG plan was similar to things Kerry had proposed 2 years before. It was an absolute LIE that they were the same.

I did not compare Clinton to Rove, I said that in SPECIFIC accusations in 2006 and 2008 respectively, they did exactly the same thing and I think it was equally dishonest in both cases. (Let me use algebra, the 2004 Obama plan == the 2004 Kerry plan and neither equaled the Bush plan.)

I never took the comment as racial - look through my posts at the time if you choose. Other comments verged on racial, but that one didn't. As to not being about Iraq, what did you think it was about?

Obama's speech was against the war and people in Chicago, who know him, know he was against the war. I have family in Chicago. As to Durbin - he voted AGAINST the war. As to voting present in Illinois, it is a recognized vote with a specific meaning in Illinois which Bill Clinton's general counsel explained well - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/opinion/16mikva.html

As to Kyl/Lieberman, which Hillary voted FOR, Obama had been told by Reid the vote would not happen that day and he had already gone to (I think NH) where there was a debate later in the day. At the time of the vote, he put himself on record as intending to vote "NO" if he were there. As there were 78 votes (including Hillary's) for it, Obama's not casting a vote didn't matter. All the vote would have done is put him on record, which he accomplished by putting himself on record.

As to FISA, I don't like his vote, - though he did vote for Dodd's amendment that would have removed the telco immunity.

[StevieM]

47. My mistake on Durbin, but beyond that ITDA

Saying Bill Clinton's general counsel said something doesn't mean anything more then saying Jimmy Carter's special counsel said something. He was an Obama supporter giving Obama's explanation--one that I totally reject.

I am aware of Hillary's vote for Kyl/Lieberman--and I think she voted the right way. I seem to remember Obama took a few days to publicize which way he would have voted, but I guess I can give him the benefit of the doubt if you say that he said something right away--but I don't remember that.

Obama represented a district on the south side of Chicago--his position at the time reflected the view of that district. From what I have seen of him, I cannot imagine that he would have voted against the War if he was representing a broader constituency. And he proved that to me again on FISA.

Steve

[karynnj]

48. Again

Mikvah, was an Obama support, but alos had been in the Illinois legislature. I grew up outside Chicago and I knew there were often present votes and they are there for a reason. The fact is that if you read the Illinois papers, you will see that people use this vote and they say what it means.

As to the IWR vote, I think that unless the person was in the Congress, you really don't know - unless there is a statement at that point in time. Howard Dean said he would have voted for Biden/Lugar and his comments were relatively tough. The fact is there was no vote on Biden/Lugar and there was no comment around the time of the actual vote that he would have voted against it. Obama did say at that time he would have voted against it. The only sign I have that he MIGHT have voted for it, is that he followed the party leadership on Kerry/Feingold. The fact though is we will never know what he would have done. The one comment he made in 2004 was to deflect the question to avoid being pushed to criticize Kerry. Any good surrogate would have done so.

The fact though is that on a political spectrum on just foreign policy, Hillary is more hawkish than Obama. Kerry is to the left of both. That still hold today. In 2008, the choice was really just HRC and Obama. Edwards was unacceptable.

[StevieM]

49. It amazes me that you don't get that what you're saying consitutes a counter-point

to argue the position from a different perspective. There is a difference between saying that you think Obama had a more satisfactory explanation and calling someone else a liar. I could just as easily say that Obama lied about Clinton's position on health care reform.

Obama seemed more then happy at the time to let the fairy tale comment be all about an alleged racial slur then about an unfair description of his Iraq War voting record.

I agree that Hillary is more hawkish and I don't have a problem with that.

Steve

[karynnj]

50. I already said why it was a lie

Unless you believe that someone as knowledgeable as Bill Clinton thought that Obama in 2004 had the same position as Bush it is a lie. That was what I said was a lie. The entire gist of Clinton's comments was that there was no difference between Obama and Clinton on Iraq. The fact is that there was a difference. Obama in 2002 said he was against it.

I think it was wrong that anyone took that as racist - as I think Clinton would have said the same of anyone else with the same record. I think the SC comments were at least insensitive. I also think that Clinton was never RACIST, nor did anyone in the Obama camp ever say that. He did play the RACE CARD though. Interestingly, it was Clinton herself who played the gender card - stating in the NH debate that she was change just because she would be the first woman and after the Philly debate when she made it the "guys picking on the girl" (her words)

The comments on foreign policy etc were NOT on why it was a lie.

[StevieM]

51. I saw it differently

I thought Obama played the race card, jumping at every opportunity to claim race-baiting.

And it amazes me how one-sided you are. Obama repeatedly would reference "studies" done which proved his proposals more effective then Clinton--never mentioning that the studies were done by his own campaign. I can only imagine how furious Obamites would have been if Hillary did that.

Hillary was the victim of misogyny, and she made me proud by how she handled herself. She proved to me that I was right to have supported her.

Steve

[ProSense]

52. "Obama played the race card" "Hillary was the victim of misogyny"

Typical primary BS. You saw what you wanted to see: The Clintons as the victims. They ran a divisive nasty campaign, and that contributed to her losing the primary.

[StevieM]

55. Oh, that fictitious narrative definitely played a role. Obama couldn't win any other way

Funny....no one had ever called the Clintons dirty campaigners before. That was just a narrative designed to benefit Obama. There is no reasonable standard that would conclude that Hillary's campaign was any more negative then Gore vs. Bradley, Hart vs. Mondale, let alone Obama's campaign against her.

[babylonsister]

56. Is StevieM bitter? So bitter you have to make stuff up and deny

reality? Poor widdle stevie.

[ProSense]

58. The bitter has gone to your head. n/t

[karynnj]

65. What??

Clinton was called a dirty campaigner in 1992 by his opponents. Do you remember that Wolfson said in 2005 that the lesson he learned in 2004 was that swiftboating worked - so they had to use it!

What was different from Hart and Bradley is that they stopped their attacks when Mondale and Gore became the likely nominees. As to Obama, it was Clinton who had several people resign due to things they shouldn't have done. Other than Samantha Powers, I can't think of any Obama person.

[karynnj]

64. You are assuming that I sided with Obama on everything

I didn't. I don't even agree with Kerry on everything.

As to the claim that he cited studies that showed his plans were better, I never heard that and I didn't hear anything from the Clinton people claiming that. If it happened, he should have been called on it - with either a HRC generated counter study or an independent one. (The fact is such evaluations are often useless as proposals lack the detail needed to seriously evaluate them.)

Hillary was not a victim of misogyny. There are many people, including me who would gladly have voted for a woman, who had reasons they would never vote for Hillary. I am one of them. My reasons had to do with character, not gender. The fact is that she had between 40 and 50 percent of Democrats, who had a choice, supporting her in 2005 and 2006. That is an unheard of percent in an open race with no incumbent. This would easily have given her the nomination. At that point, all those people obviously KNEW she was a woman. Therefore, it was some other reason some deserted her. The nomination was hers to lose and she did.

You, of course, have the right to have supported anyone you chose and clearly you saw things in her that I didn't or your values are different.

[StevieM]

67. The poll numbers you gave for 05 and 06 are flat out incorrect

And they don't even include Obama in the race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates

Furthermore, Al Gore had a bigger lead in 2000. George W. Bush had a bigger lead in 2000. Walter Mondale had a bigger lead in 1984. George HW Bush had a bigger lead in 1988. I suspect that Gary Hart had a greater, or comparable lead in 87 before scandal knocked him out. Her lead was probably about what Bob Dole had in 96, and Dole never had to run against a superstar like Obama, who was not an insurgent who came out of nowhere, but rather a candidate who entered the race with tremendous name ID and favorable numbers.

The best analogy to Clinton/Obama is if Gary Hart had been challenged by Mario Cuomo in 88, with Hart not being driven out of the race. Obama was a candidate at the level of Cuomo from day one, and Clinton never had advantages beyond what Hart had. It would hardly have been shocking, or pathetic, if Cuomo had upended Hart.

I consider it misogynistic to dismiss Hillary's accomplishments, and early poll numbers, as having been handed off to her by Bill Clinton. She earned that lead in the polls. I was not a huge supporter of hers when she first went to the Senate--she won me over. And she did the same with millions of Americans, who in 2001 never would have considered her for president. She earned her poll numbers and she earned every vote she got.

Hillary Clinton may never be president, but IMO she will surely go down as the greatest president we never had. And supporting Secretary Clinton's magnificent 2008 presidential campaign was the proudest experience of my life.

Steve

[ProSense]

68. "Hillary...may never be president, but IMO she will...go down as the greatest president we never had

She wasn't even a nominee. Her health care plan, lacking catastrohpic care coverage and heavily reliant on mandates and penalties, was worse than Obama's.

You really need to get over the bitterness. Her campaign wasn't that great, she set a record for the most debt ever.

[StevieM]

69. This is just nastiness on your part. First of all, I am entitled to my opinion.

Second, she set a debt record because she was competing against an unstoppable fundraising machine in Obama. She also broke all previous fundraising records, Obama just broke them by more. She was trying to keep up and get her message out.

As for health care, her plan called for universal coverage, a historic first. Second, the reference to penalties in the campaign was a reference to Mitt Romney, whose plan Obama somehow thought he could use against Hillary. He won in the end, but I doubt that was why (and he lost Ohio, where he brought it up). Third, Obama's current plans rely heavily on mandates. Fourth, as we've seen, plans evolve over time and I seriously doubt that the health care debate would not be talking about catastrophic care coverage if Hillary was president right now.

Steve

[ProSense]

70. What?

"Second, she set a debt record because she was competing against an unstoppable fundraising machine in Obama."

Are you seriously trying to blame Obama's fundraising for Hillary's debt?

Hillary is not a perpetual victim. Her missteps are not automatically someone else's fault. Her lousy campaign was not Obama's fault.

"As for health care, her plan called for universal coverage, a historic first."

Are you confused? Kerry had a plan for universal coverage that included both a public option and catastrophic care coverage and no mandates. It was the plan that all the Democrats cherry picked.

[StevieM]

71. I meant that having universal health care would be a historic first, no small deal

I don't "blame" anyone for Hillary's debt--there is nothing to place blame about. She needed more money so that she could stay on the airwaves. So she borrowed it. Not a big deal.

I never said Obama was at fault for her "lousy" campaign, because I don't agree that it was a lousy campaign. Obviously, you cherish the notion that history is written by the winners, and relish the ability to deliver your hateful narratives as fact.

Steve

[karynnj]

77. There is nothing hateful in her comments

Just as you have a right to your opinion, she has a right to hers.

Having universal access to healthcare is a historic first, but running on it isn't - and that is ALL HRC did. Now, you could say that had she became President, she, not Obama would be the one to have signed it into law. The same thing could have been said of Obama and Edwards - or Kerry and Dean. Anyone who strongly supports a candidate will feel the pain of them not being able to accomplish the goals they would have had they won.

Though it is presumptuous of me to speak for Prosense, I assume that she, like me, has felt the same thing with regard to Kerry. I would argue that it was MORE painful, because instead of seeing someone else do what your candidate would have done, we saw a criminal government do exactly the opposite. Had Kerry won, we would have internationalized the Iraq war in 2005 and likely been out by 2007. Kerry would have used the death of Arafat, to help Abbas provide services in Gaza and the West Bank, preventing Hamas from winning an election - giving Israel a partner to negotiate with. Kerry would have strengthened environmental laws instead of Bush weakening them and he would have led on climate change, both issues dear to his and Teresa's hearts. Now, I don't think Kerry could have gotten healthcare through the 109th Congress. He would have had a very tough 4 years and he might well have been a one term President - but he likely would have deserved and earned a Nobel peace prize for turning American policy - and he would have made the world and country a better place.

[karynnj]

76. The fact is the word "universal coverage" is thrown around too much

Kerry's plan was estimated to likely cover 95% of people - though 100% of people COULD get coverage. Kerry recognized that ultimately mandates might be needed, but in his 2006 Faneuil Hall speech he called for their inclusion in 2012 after things like his reinsurance of catastrophic costs had lower costs. Kerry did not think there was support in Congress or the country for mandates at that point.

The fact is that in reality the only universal health care would be a system that signed up the people who did not do so on their own. Unless this happened - even with mandates there will be some who fail to get the mandated insurance. So, in reality, Kerry's 2004 plan might have covered nearly the same percent.

But, Kerry was not the first. Harry Truman called for it when both Kerry and Clinton were in elementary school!

[karynnj]

75. In 2006, Kerry tweaked his 2004 nearly universal plan to be a universal plan

That was BEFORE Hillary's plan. Even the 2004 plan was designed to cover about 95% of people. That plan, which Kerry announced in one of his Faneuil Hall speeches was intended to be his 2008 plan.

In addition, the Edwards' plan in 2008 was universal and put out before Hillary's.

All three plans were not far from Kerry's 2004 plan. I posted several times during the primaries that the goals and design of all the plans were so close that the actual bill under any of them would not be different. The big reason mandates were added was that the Business Council, an association of CEO's of the leading big companies strongly supported it. In late 2008, Ivan Seidenberg of Verzion made the case for them in a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee. That backing was critically important.

[karynnj]

74. As to the polling, you are wrong

There are plenty of polls placing her above 40% (which means she was between 40 and 50 percent. Looking at most of 2005 and 2006 the best estimate is that she was slightly above 40 percent.

As to your comparisons, I said an OPEN race. Although I should have said Democrat because the Republican dynamics are different, your examples are wrong. 2005 and 2006 would be equivalent to 1997 and 1998 for the 2000 race - that was before Bush became the favorite - http://pollingreport.com/wh2rep.htm GHWB does not count because he was the sitting VP as was Gore. They were not truly open. Hart was the clear frontrunner for 1988 (not 1987), but he did not dominate the field to anywhere near the same level. Mondale was not the initial frontrunner in 1984, Kennedy was until he said he was not running. http://pollingreport.com/wh2rep.htm He never dominated to the degree Hillary did.

Nowhere did I say that Bill Clinton was why she had those poll numbers, but the fact is that being Mrs Bill Clinton did play a role.
What exactly were Hillary's Senate accomplishments? She was a very junior Senator, who to my knowledge really did not lead on anything. At one point, SCHIP was what she cited was her biggest accomplishment - but her role, which was important, was that she persuaded Bill Clinton to include funding in the budget for it. That was a Ted Kennedy/Orrin Hatch bill that they got through a Senate with 55 Republicans, their bill was a modified version of a Kerry/Kennedy bill from the previous year that was based on an existing MA program. This makes it hard to say that Bill Clinton had nothing to do with it.

Clinton had advantages beyond those Hart had - she had the unqualified support of Bill Clinton and substantial party support. Until 2008, Obama had very little party support - with only Durbin endorsing him. (Kerry offered his support in late 2007 and offered to let Obama chose where and when he would give it) The fact is the CW was that she was the inevitable candidate.

The fact is many people have their own ideas of the best President we never had. Everyone is welcome to their opinion. I would put both Kerry, Robert Kennedy, Hart, and Gore ahead of Clinton. (If I had to pick just one - it would have been RFK, because he would have ended the Vietnam War before almost half of those killed would have died. RFK with the Democratic Congress he had could have then done things like expand healthcare. In addition, think of all the evil people rooted in the Nixon era, who might never have seen power! Second would be Kerry, would have had the dysfunctional 109th Congress, but who could have changed American foreign policy in ways he spoke of since his days at Yale.

[StevieM]

78. I just did the math on the polling and here is what the early averages were

In 2005 to 2006 she averaged 36.1% in the polls. In 2006 alone she averaged 34.9% in the polls.

You are the one who said she had the biggest lead ever, or something to that effect. 35% is not the biggest lead ever, nor is it overwhelming. And it doesn't matter what status Gore and Bush Sr. held--they had bigger leads, so your description of the comparative size of her advantage is incorrect.

As for Mondale, it doesn't matter what might have happened if Kennedy had entered--because Kennedy didn't enter. And Mondale had a bigger lead over Hart, Jackson, McGovern, Glenn, Cranston and Hollings then Hillary had over the field in her election year.

For the first three months of 2007 Obama averaged 22.4% in the polls, while Hillary was at 35.8%--hardly an overwhelming advantage. And, yes, Hart did have a bigger advantage over Dukakis, Babbitt, Gephardt, etc.

I also seem to remember Mitt Romney had a pretty big lead in Iowa and New Hampshire at one point.

Hillary Clinton was a candidate who entered in the mid-30s. Obama was a candidate who was a superstar and a major threat from day one. He was a bigger star then John McCain was in 1999. Hillary moved up her announcement date by months when she learned Obama was running. And the lead that she built up over the course of 2007 was a lead that she earned--no one gave it to her, nor was it her starting point.

I'm done fighting with you. You will never miss an opportunity to belittle Secretary Clinton, and there is nothing I can do about it. I consider myself a better person for having volunteered for her and worked my heart out to elect her.

Steve

[Mass]

60. Any reason why? Or just that you do not like Kerry?

Even if part of it is diplomatic, it is a nice gesture from Obama and a recognition of the role Kerry has had in this election. Nothing forced Obama to do so, particularly once he was elected. The rest is irrelevant.

[Jennicut]

2. Kerry did a lot to pave the way imo.

His debates against Bush were incredible back in 2004.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

5. Crack? n/t

[Cha]

10. WTF!!

Yes, Senator Kerry did an Excellent in debating that fucking idiot bush even with the moderators pimping for corporatewhores.

[Jennicut]

11. I missed what the deleted message was but if anyone thinks

Kerry did not kick Bush's ass over and over again is lying to themselves. He won all 3 debates, clearly.

[Cha]

12. Good I'm glad it got deleted!

And, I won't say what or I'll get deleted:) But, it was grossly stupid beyond words.

[_dynamicdems]

35. Amen.

The mods were terrible.

And Senator Kerry kicked ass.

[wisteria]

8. They were the best debates I ever watched. Kerry was fantastic and so much was at stake then. n/t

[ccharles000]

3. k/r

[Adelante]

6. That was nice of the President to send that note

Kerry did a great deal to help during the primaries, too.

[Egnever]

7. Yes he is

Kerry was first on board for his presidential run as well and his support went a long way to bringing other main stream support on board.

[wisteria]

9. It is great to see the acknowledgment from President Obama.

Senator Kerry is a visionary and a true patriot and a politician for the people. He should be our president now. And, the SOS position should have been his to turn down, but I can figure out what happened with this position. However, it is wonderful to now see him receive the credit and respect he deserves.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

13. It saddened and angered me

to see what Kerry went through during the 2004 run -- a target of the same kinds of lies and distortions that have been dominating the health care "debate" and threatened Obama's run as well. As much of a champion as I am of free speech, it infuriates me that those with the ethics of a snake oil salesman can be given such a voice by the media and the politicians who deploy them.

Politics isn't hardball with these people involved. It's dirty pool. And whether or not you believe the election was rigged, Kerry deserved to have a fair run, free of these kinds of attacks.

After the 2004 election was called, an associate -- who loved and supported W. -- turned to me with a look of feigned empathy and said, "Are you okay?" I've never wanted to put a fist in anyone's face as badly as I did at that moment. And she was a woman. Someone who not only believed the lies about Kerry but undoubtedly helped perpetuate them.

I don't care what your political affiliation is. What happened to the man just wasn't right.

[wisteria]

19. I totally agree. The tactics used against kerry then were the lowest of the low. n/t

[Qutzupalotl]

30. Obama's victory must be a vindication of sorts to Kerry,

if Kerry couldn't be president himself. This must make him feel a little bit better about how it all went down. It's a tremendous relief to me -- and I felt about like you did when Kerry "lost".

[Hav]

14. Nice.

I think it's a very nice gesture and I suppose these few words also mean a lot to Kerry. Obama has accomplished very much because of his own abilities but it's a sign of a good character to remember and acknowledge those who helped pave his way and who offered him opportunities.

[ohtransplant]

16. K&R

1) Obama is right.

2) Senator Kerry kicked W's ass in all 3 debates.

3) Senator Kerry's decision not to run in 08 and his early endorsement were key to building credibility and momentum for BO.

4) Senator Kerry should have been our president in 2004. It's to our detriment that he wasn't.

Move on...

[AspenRose]

17. +1

Spot on

[emulatorloo]

18. Short Clear and Sweet n/t

[ClayZ]

33. Bingo!

K and R

[politicasista]

20. Kick

for President Obama and Senator Kerry. Two good patriots. :patriot:


:kick:

[cadmium]

22. This little exchange was nice (partial clip)

Kerry v Kyl for Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPwSvHDvWi0

[invictus]

23. Actually Obama is there because of us: the little people who voted, gave money, campaigned for him.

Thanks for remembering. :eyes:

[phleshdef]

24. Get over yourself. Obama never would have been even looked at if not for Kerry.

[babylonsister]

25. Gimme a break. That upsets you? Obama thanking someone

for putting him on a national stage where we could see and hear him, most of us for the first time? Did you do that?

[politicasista]

26. Yep. That seems bothers people

for some reason.

As I said above, their problem. Not ours. :hi:

[ProSense]

27. Thank you Senator Kerry

and Thank you President Obama.

[saltpoint]

28. Strongly recommended. Kerry knew a gifted soul when he saw one

and when he heard one and what a total exhilaration it was to watch on C-Span as this young Obama fellow from Illinois held the nation's rapt attention with that speech.

For anyone who didn't see it, live or later, you missed a lot.

[Inuca]

46. Beautifully put n/t

[Clio the Leo]

29. Thank you Senator Kerry.........

.... you helped make history!

[beachmom]

31. I've been waiting for over 4 years for Kerry to get his due in MSMland.

And now it has happened. There is justice in the world after all.

[wisteria]

Amen. n/t

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[_dynamicdems]

36. Very nice article.

John Kerry is the most underrated politician of our time. He's a real American hero and I'm happy to see that President Obama appreciates Senator Kerry's support.

[saltpoint]

37. Here's another kick for a great post about some great Democrats.

I hope some of our younger folks around here will research John Kerry's early public profile during the Vietnam years. It would go a long way toward filling in some gaps.

He's the real deal and has been for some time.

[YvonneCa]

72. Saltpoint, when you are right...

...you are REALLY right. :7 :patriot:

[JanusAscending]

38. Thanks Sis!!

Best news I've heard all day! I loves me some Kerry and Obama!!

[Lord Helmet]

39. k 'n r

:thumbsup:

[Divine Discontent]

53. wow! TIME did something good here! praising Senator Kerry is a very very very wise thing! He rocks

[NYC Liberal]

54. Here at DU, Obama gets attacked for sending a thank you note to a fellow Democrat

Gotta love it!

And Obama is right! That speech launched Obama into the spotlight and really got his name out there.

I do wish we were heading into President Kerry's 2nd term :( But since that didn't happen, I'm glad we have President Obama now!

[Divine Discontent]

57. yep! Its sad we didn't get a Gore or Kerry presidency...

the thefts of their wins only made it more easy for Obama to smash McSame. Combining the interest of the ethnic-American vote along with the desire for massive change (even if these 25% rant and rave and carry guns in the streets) made Obama an easy winner.



HEALTH CARE CHANGES NOW!

[NYC Liberal]

59. 2000 hurt the most

Because Gore DID win. I think today most people know it, and even Republicans will just tell you to "get over it."

537 vote margin, certified by Bush's campaign chair in Florida and his brother. And affirmed by 5 on the Supreme Court. That's all it took.

[Mass]

61. Two great democrats.

Too bad that some cannot see a thread like that without spreading their bitterness.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

62. A classy tribute from a classy President to a classy Senator

I was devastated and still am devastated that Senator Kerry never became President. He has been a first-class Senator in many ways and would have been a great and inspirational President. But I will always respect and credit Senator Kerry for taking a chance on Obama for the 2004 Democratic National Convention keynote address and then consistently sticking his neck out for Obama time and time again when it mattered the most. What a remarkable Senator and a remarkable man Senator Kerry is.

[politicasista]

63. +1 n/t

[karynnj]

66. How true

[rockymountaindem]

73. Word n/t